FASHIONING POWER Visual Self-Presentation in Social Life

by

Anna Akbari

May 2008

Submitted to The New School for Social Research of The New School in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

Dissertation Committee: Dr. Jeffrey Goldfarb Dr. Elzbieta Matynia Dr. Jaeho Kang Dr. Marshall Blonsky

ABSTRACT

This dissertation serves as a contribution to the field of visual sociology, as it addresses how fashion operates as a visually articulated social system that facilitates the negotiation of power. By exploring the various facets of one’s visual self-presentation – new media, sexuality and the workplace, visual conformity and rebellion, techniques of the body, and the transience of identity in a consumer society – it looks at how fashion creates a “space of appearance” within the human drama, which facilitates the individual’s ability to speak freely and claim power. The dissertation argues that one’s ability to acquire social capital is no longer linked exclusively to one’s economic and social status, nor is one limited to the reality of biographical circumstances, but rather, this power stems from the exploration and articulation of one’s possible selves, through a commitment to both imaginative change and youthful self-preservation.

© 2008 Anna Akbari

1

DEDICATION

To my mother, Jean, who recognized and supported my affinity for “playing dress-up” well into my adulthood and never discouraged me from transforming this obsession into my occupational passion.

To the residents of the Hillside Apartments, my childhood neighborhood community, who served both as generous donors of costume paraphernalia and as indefatigable audience members in my daily parade of characters.

To Bob Pollack, retailer-extraordinaire, who gave me my first formal induction into the elite hierarchy of the fashion system. By seeing beyond my initially all-black, flea market attire and permitting me to serve as his luxury clothing apprentice on Nantucket, he provided a space where my sociological imagination and sartorial predilections could begin to merge.

Thank you. I wrote this not only for you, but because of you.

2 vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am deeply indebted to the following people for their generous contributions to this project:

• My interviewees, who believed in the project enough to dedicate their time and biographical details to it. Thank you for trusting me with your stories.

• My extraordinary photographer and field experiment sidekick, Darren Kaminsky, whose artistic vision and sharp photographic eye emanates from these pages.

• The amazing, multi-talented David Stithem – without whom, I’d still be transcribing…

• My dissertation committee – Jeffrey Goldfarb, Elzbieta Matynia, Jaeho Kang, and Marshall Blonsky – whose intellectual and professional guidance has been invaluable.

• Additional thanks to Ray Olivares, Sarah Stodola, and Belinda Bellas for your individual contributions.

• And finally, I wish to thank the great city of New York – my inspiration, my archive, my stage, my home:

The city is like poetry: it compresses all life, all races and breeds, into a small island and adds music and the accompaniment of internal engines. The island of Manhattan is without any doubt the greatest human concentrate on earth, the poem whose magic is comprehensible to millions of permanent residents, but whose full meaning will always remain elusive. (E.B. White, Here is New York )

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vi

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ix

Part I INTRODUCTION AND THEORY 1

1. Introduction 2 i. An Introduction to the Project and Statement of Purpose 2 a. Objectives, Hypotheses, and Outcomes 6 b. A Note on Feminism 8 ii. Approach to the Field 9 a. The City 9 b. Visual Sociology: Sociology through Fashion 12 c. Methodology 13 iii. A Note on the Social Origins of Dress 17 2. The Social Nature of Fashion 20 i. Public Theatricality and Everyday Performances 24 a. The Tension between Group Belonging and Individual Differentiation 24 b. Strategic Masking and Claims to Authenticity 31

Part II EMPIRICAL RESEARCH AND FINDINGS 36

3. Mediated Fashion: The Politics of Seeing and Being Seen 37 i. The Cunning of Color 43 ii. Street Cred: Physiognomy and Urban Tribalism 49 iii. Rethinking Reality: Media and Celebrity in Everyday Life 59 4. Outfitting Success: Sex, Dress, and Professionalism 77 i. Suiting Up: Office Armor and the Fight for Visibility 84 ii. Wrapped in Sex, Robed in Confidence: Workin’ It in the Workplace 98 5. Uniformity, Conformity, and Rebellion: Erasure and Emphasis in Visual Self- 114 Presentation i. Distinguished Compliance: Obedience and Individuality in Social Appearance 14 ii. Sartorial Subversion: Revealing and Concealing through Defiant Dress 130 6. Commodified Flesh: Beauty and the Body in the Regime of Fashion 154 i. Survival of the Fittest: Ephemerality and Consumerism 154 ii. The Beauty Imperative: Making Myths a Reality 162 iii. Body Over Mind: Nip, Tuck, Embalm 172 7. Embodied Branding: Reification and Identity in a Consumer Society 183 viii

i. “I Shop Therefore I Am” 183 ii. Blurred Identity: Becoming the Brand 190 iii. The Democratization of Fashion 201

Part III CONCLUSION 212

8. Fashioning Possibility 213

Bibliography 219 Appendix A: Interviewee Photographs 228

ix

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

1. Photo by Jean Neibauer iv 2. Photo by Jean Neibauer v 3. Photo by Ray Olivares 9 4. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 20 5. Photo by Weegee (Arthur Felling) (c. 1939) 24 6. Photo by Amy Rea 31 7. Photo by Ray Olivares 33 8. Photo by Lisa D. (Spring/Summer 1997 collection) 35 9. Photo by Ray Olivares 37 10. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 38 11. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 38 12. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 40 13. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 41 14. Screen capture from http://www.colorassociation.com/site/colortrends.html (Spring/Summer 2008; women’s) 45 15. Photo from Fader Magazine 49 16. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 51 17. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 52 18. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 53 19. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 54 20. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 59 21. Photo by Scott Schuman, The Sartorialist (http://thesartorialist.blogspot.com/search?q=lynn+yaeger) 63 22. Screen capture from http://www.the-english-club.com/celebrities-club/412- celebrities-without-makeup.html 67 23. Screen capture from http://www.the-english-club.com/celebrities-club/412- celebrities-without-makeup.html 67 24. Screen capture from http://www.the-english-club.com/celebrities-club/412- celebrities-without-makeup.html 67 25. Photo by Adam Hoff for New York Magazine 73 26. Photo from Victoria’s Secret “Travel Suit Collection” Advertising Campaign (August 2007) 77 27. Painting by Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger (c. 1592), National Gallery London 83 28. Photo from Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, Russia 83 29. Photo from Leicestershire County Council 89 30. Photo from AFP, Alex Perry's collection for Australian Fashion Week 2007 92 31. Photo from La Parisien 94 32. Photo by Associated Press 94 33. Photo from http://rangelife.typepad.com/rangelife/images/condi.JPG 94 x

34. Photos by (left-to-right) Charles Dharapak/Associated Press; Aharaz N. Ghanbari/Associated Press; Mandel Ngan/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images; Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images; Joe Raedle/Getty Images – from NY Times article http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/18/fashion/18pelosi.html 94 35. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 98 36. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 99 37. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 100 38. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 102 39. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 102 40. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 103 41. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 103 42. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 114 43. Photo from http://davidinjapan.wordpress.com/2007/10/ 120 44. Photo from http://www.spacetoys.com/proddetail.php?prod=CST11 121 45. Photo by Ari Versluis 124 46. Photo by Ari Versluis 124 47. Photo by Ari Versluis 125 48. Photo by Ari Versluis 125 49. Photo by Ari Versluis 125 50. Photo by Ari Versluis 125 51. Photo by Ari Versluis 126 52. Photo by Ari Versluis 126 53. Photo by Ari Versluis 126 54. Photo by Ari Versluis 126 55. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 130 56. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 131 57. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 132 58. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 132 59. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 133 60. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 134 61. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 134 62. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 135 63. NY Post Cover from http://www.nypost.com/seven/04252007/frontback.htm 136 64. Photos by (left-to-right) Pierre Verdy/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images, left and middle; Michel Euler/Associated Press – from NY Times article http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/05/weekinreview/05rosenbloom.html?sc p=1&sq=The+Obscure+and+Uncertain+Semiotics+of+Fashion&st=nyt 139 65. Photo from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/05/weekinreview/05rosenbloom.html?sc p=1&sq=The+Obscure+and+Uncertain+Semiotics+of+Fashion&st=nyt 139 66. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 142 xi

67. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 143 68. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 144 69. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 144 70. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 145 71. 15 th Century Miniature from National Archive at the Museum of the History of France 147 72. Photo by Elinor Carucci for the New York Times ) 150 73. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 154 74. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 158 75. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 162 76. Photo by Avril Owton 163 77. Photo from Britannica Archive Photos 164 78. Photo by Hamish McDonald 166 79. Photo by Michael Yarish for Fox 169 80. Photo by Michael Yarish for Fox 169 81. Photo from http://buttforyou.com 171 82. Photo from http://buttforyou.com 171 83. Photo by Carrie Jaxon 172 84. Photo by Carrie Jaxon 174 85. Photo by Arthur Fellig (a.k.a. Weegee) 176 86. Cartoon by Barbara Smaller, published in the New Yorker January 19, 2004 183 87. Photo by Barbara Kruger 184 88. Photo from Braniff Archives 193 89. Sketches by Kate Spade 193 90. Photo from Kate Spade 193 91. Photo by Anna Akbari 194 92. Photo by Andres H. Walker/Getty Images 195 93. Bracelet from Cartier 196 94. Photo by Roslan Rahman for AFP/Getty Images 197 95. Photo from http://www.fulla.us/ 199 96. Photo by Juergen Koehler 201 97. Photo by Sean Ganann 201 98. Logo from Alexander Julian 207 99. Advertisement from Target 209 100. Photo by Brad Barkett/ Getty Images 209 101. Advertisement from H&M 209 102. Photo by Elizabeth Lippman for the New York Times 210 103. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 213 104. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 215 105. Photo by Darren Kaminsky 218 106. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 228 107. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 228 108. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 228 xii

109. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 228 110. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 228 111. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 229 112. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 229 113. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 229 114. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 229 115. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 230 116. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 230 117. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 230 118. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 230 119. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 231 120. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 231 121. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 231 122. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 231 123. INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPH 231

1

Part I

Introduction and Theory 2

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

An Introduction to the Project and Statement of Purpose

Fashion is the science of appearances, and it inspires one with the desire to seem rather than to be. (de Montaigne 1927 (1575))

All meaningful discourse seeks to end appearances…it is also an impossible undertaking. (Baudrillard 1991, 54)

The greatest that man can achieve is his own appearance. (Arendt 1958, 208)

This project aims to explore a neglected side of social life: how fashion and dress operate as a visually articulated social system that facilitates the negotiation of power.

This power is a direct result of the exploration and articulation of one’s “possible selves”

– personally applied identities that stem from the imagination and embody the experimentality of being – which radically transform traditional notions of inherited power via social class . 1 This is a heretofore under-interpreted area of academic inquiry and critical social analysis, and the combined texts (the pre-existing literature, as well as my own primary sources generated through this project) present an opportunity for new illumination on the topic. The project contributes to and makes an argument for the emerging field of visual sociology, which focuses on the visual dimension of social life and explores the visual data produced by a culture – in this case, conducted as a type of

“sociology through fashion,” which examines the visual self-presentation of individuals in the social realm. 21 st century New York City is the locus of the inquiry, as I focus not

1 I have developed this idea drawing upon an interview I conducted with Arjun Appadurai, March 4, 2007. 3

on the historical lineage of fashion (although it is a consideration), but rather its modern manifestation in an urban, globalized setting.

One may look to Malcolm Barnard’s exploration of the etymology of fashion in

Fashion as Communication (1996) as a useful starting point for an exploration of its cultural meanings. According to his analysis, the word ‘fashion’ stems from the Latin word factio , which means “making or doing,” and facere , “to make or to do.” Thus, fashion is rooted in action. Further extending the etymological lineage, ‘faction’ is also derived from factio , which, as Susan Kaiser argues, suggests “how fashion becomes a process of differentiating groups of individuals from one another.” 2 Fashion is therefore

inherently both creative and political in nature, and the title of this project alludes to these

political, creative impulses: “Fashioning Power” refers to the intimate relationship

between fashion and power, while the subtitle, “Visual Self-Presentation in Social Life,”

reinforces the creative means by which this power is obtained – the process through

which fashion communicates, speaks, influences, and radiates a transformative power

(both personally and socially) when it is exercised and viewed publicly.

The dissertation is theoretically grounded in Georg Simmel’s approach to

sociology, in which one constantly negotiates the relationship between the freedom of

individual expression and the pressure toward group conformity. From that starting

point, the inspiration for this fashion/power relationship – which occurs similarly within

instances of conformity and individualism – is taken from Hannah Arendt’s ideas on

“Power and the Space of Appearance” in The Human Condition (1958). For Arendt,

2 Susan Kaiser, Cultural Studies of Fashion and Style (unpublished draft, 2008). 4

power begins with public appearance, as it is one’s appearance in the public realm that makes the self concrete and real – and thus able to claim power: “Compared with the reality which comes from being seen and heard, even the greatest forces of intimate life…lead an uncertain, shadowy kind of existence until they are transformed, deprivatized and deindividualized…into a shape to fit them for public appearance”

(Arendt 1958, 51). Arendt refers to the public realm as the “space of appearance,” in which power lives and is negotiated through communal, public action:

The space of appearance comes into being wherever men are together in the manner of speech and action…Power is what keeps the public realm, the potential space of appearance between acting and speaking men, in existence…Power springs up between men when they act together and vanishes the moment they disperse. (Arendt 1958, 199-200)

In this context, “action” and “speech” may be understood in their traditional, literal senses, as well as in relationship to visual self-presentation. Part of “action” is nonverbal, visual communication which is articulated through the language of fashion and dress. If, according to Arendt, power is present when people speak, fashion serves as a mode of individual speech and a system of social communication. In this sense, fashion does more than merely define socio-economic classes and shape their experiences; it also mediates and assigns power as one essays to distinguish and belong in social circumstances. Thus, there is a type of performative democracy at work, in which citizen-actors must have the power to “speak” in order to change reality, and in order to obtain that power, they must claim the stage – their personal space of appearance – where they may speak freely. This theatrical language is supported by the work of Erving

Goffman, who wrote on the “possibilities and the tyranny of appearance, or what we call 5

the presentation of the self…in which social life [is] theatrical” (Arjun Appadurai 3) and

“the ‘aesthetic’ as a dimension of all social experience” (Sennett 1973). It is his language

and imagery around the performance of self in everyday life that I will use to

complement Arendt’s thoughts on power.

While everyone participates in this visual, public drama, to a certain extent, one

may refuse to fully engage in the action – with consequences. “Whoever, for whatever

reasons, isolates himself and does not partake in such being together, forfeits power and

becomes impotent, no matter how great his strength and how valid his reasons” (Arendt

1958, 201). If one chooses not to play a part in this exchange of visual action, she is

rendered powerless, unable to speak effectively on her own behalf.

Fashion is too often dismissed as merely class-rooted, capricious whimsy or

capitalistic consumerism. While I do not wish to argue against either of those facets of

fashion, I want to examine the culture of fashion and the vicissitudes of dress as a system

of fashion that is potent, strategically malleable, and in the words of Thomas Carlyle, “so

unspeakably significant” (Carlyle 1987 (1831), 56). I argue against the conventional

reductionism by which fashion has been intellectually approached (especially within

academia) and attempt to demonstrate how fashion does not merely distinguish class and

economic worth, but rather is more of a cultural issue, as it is a politically-charged tool

for negotiating one’s social capital. This social capital is achieved, accumulated, and

possessed in a constant state of flux, to varying degrees, relative to the level of visual

articulation expressed by the individual – the circumstances of which will be explored

3 Arjun Appadurai, interview by author, New York, NY, March 4, 2008. 6

throughout this dissertation. While inherited class differences and personal economic potency historically determined one’s social capital, I argue that youthfulness and imagination, when applied to one’s visual self-presentation, offer a new outlet to seize and sustain social prowess and a space for appearance. Fashion lends itself most readily to an immediate, impulsive, non-verbal distinction amongst people and groups; but perhaps the 21 st century code of public appearances reveals less about who we are than what we want others to think we might be. How the self is presented is not arbitrary, but rather a political statement that seeps into every facet and “crack” of one’s life (to use

Erving Goffman’s language).

Objectives, Hypotheses, and Outcomes

One’s dress – the subtle and the bold choices, the habitualized and the occasional outbursts alike – largely determines the nature and potency of one’s social associations, ability to excel, and fluidity in moving through public spaces. This project explores this idea through the following chapters and sub-themes:

Chapter 2, The Social Nature of Fashion, creates a theoretical base for the

empirical study. It looks beyond fashion as merely a class-distinguisher, and

instead presents it as a paradigm for all modern conduct and social interaction

and as a system of visual communication. It explores the tension between

group belonging and individual differentiation, as fashion operates as a

collective device that seeps into social exchanges and serves as a tool in the

negotiation of power and the quest for distinction. 7

Chapter 3, Mediated Fashion: The Power of Seeing and Being Seen,

investigates the extent to which fashion is powerless if it is not seen.

Through an examination of the power of color, the visible self in an urban

landscape, and the role of global innovations in media and technology in

identify formation and self-presentation, I investigate the ever-evolving lens

through which fashion is mediated within the public realm and power is

assigned .

Chapter 4, Outfitting Success: Sex, Dress, and Professionalism, explores

power and dress in the workplace through an examination of the image

management industry, an analysis of the suit and differences in gender-

specific dress codes, and the relationship between sexuality and perceived

professional competence.

Chapter 5, Uniformity, Conformity, and Rebellion: Erasure and

Emphasis in Visual Self-Presentation, focuses on outlets for rebellion within

restrictive dress codes and uniforms, contrasted with one’s propensity for

compliance. It also discusses masking and concealment through specific dress

strategies, such as veiling and gender subversion, and explores the extent to

which there is potency in visual defiance.

Chapter 6, Commodified Flesh: Beauty and the Body in an Image

Society , looks at the ephemerality of the body and its role as social capital and

a valuable currency for exchange . It explores the impact of a “beauty

imperative” and the modern methods of physical transformation and bodily 8

manipulation, as well as the social consequences of one’s choice to participate

in or refrain from those augmentations.

Chapter 7, Embodied Branding: Reification and Identity in a Consumer

Society , examines the relationships individuals form with objects of

consumption, and how those alliances serve as tools for identity construction

and social empowerment. It also looks at the diminishing line between

branding and identity, and the increasing democratization of fashion.

A Note on Feminism:

Feminist writing and ideology is at least peripherally related to many of the topics and subtopics explored in this project. Given its focus on gender inequality and power relations, sexual discrimination and oppression, and methods of controlling the body

(amongst numerous other issues), feminist critique would be a logical complement to my analysis of the relationship between fashion and power: The liberal feminism of writers like Betty Friedan, Gloria Steinem, and Naomi Wolf does inform my perception of how interaction between the sexes shifts social and political inequality, and it is important to note the radical feminist perspective that capitalist hierarchy is inherently sexist and oppressive. Post-modern feminists like Judith Butler contribute to my understanding of gender as a performative social construct, while sex-positive feminism and its commitment to universal sexual freedom – including pornography and prostitution – offer an intriguing springboard for my analysis of women in the workplace. However, while that theoretical lineage does inform my argument, it is not my focus, and I am not 9

taking a categorically feminist position – not because I am philosophically opposed to it, but because my project is of a different nature.

Approach to the Field

The City

The need to stand out grows in proportion to the density of cohabitation; that is why fashion is a metropolitan phenomenon. (Kracauer 1995 (1963), 247) 4

I have selected New York City (NYC) as the setting and geographical focus of my project. On a practical level, NYC is my home and a region of intimate familiarity. On a theoretical level, NYC avails itself to the study as both the nation’s financial capital and its fashion Mecca, as well as it main “image hub.” “Consuming” and “appearing” are

two of the city’s foremost ambitions and the

driving force behind many of its citizens’

actions. The metropolis’s unparalleled ethnic,

economic, and cultural diversity further

enhances the invaluable richness of the site for

this project.

NYC, perhaps more than any other 3 American city, epitomizes the public

theatricality offered by a city-as-theater style of

urban living and exemplifies the culture of

4 As derived from Simmel’s essay, “Fashion”: Simmel, Georg. “Fashion,” in On Individuality and Social Forms, ed. Donald N. Levine (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1901 (1971)). 10

change inherent to fashion. Using the view from the 110 th floor of the World Trade

Center, Michel de Certeau writes that the city’s “present invents itself, from hour to hour, in the act of throwing away its previous accomplishments and challenging the future” (de

Certeau 1984, 91), presciently articulating the profound transience of the city. This transience extends to the individual actors who play roles upon the city’s urban stage, as the way in which we carry out these roles via self-fashioning, affects the larger social order. De Certeau also directly links the city with power, stating that “the language of power is in itself ‘urbanizing’” (de Certeau 1984, 95), further grounding the city-fashion- power connection.

Richard Sennett also fosters a theatrical understanding of the city. In The Fall of

Public Man (1976), he contends that the city is the preeminent locale for a sociological inquiry into the theatrical dynamic of the “public sphere”5: it is the “cosmopolis,” the

“setting where modern public life, based on an impersonal, bourgeois, secular society,

first took hold” (Sennett 1976, 37). Sennett’s depiction of the theatricality of the city is

preceded by the work of Erving Goffman and Georg Simmel, both of whom present a

type of urban sociology whose “analysis is aimed at describing the forms of

consciousness induced by living in a city” (Sennett 1973). Arjun Appadurai speaks to the

role of urbanity in Goffman’s analysis: “The body is a social agent leaking its way

through these crowded public places…You require a certain kind of an urban edge. An

edginess that Goffman doesn’t actually articulate, because he sees this as just the nature

5 While Sennett refers to it as the “public sphere,” I find that term problematic and will use Arendt’s understanding of the public realm – to be further detailed later in the text.

11

of social life” (Arjun Appadurai 6). The urban setting provides a peculiar place where one strives to be more neutral in an effort to blend in and secure protection from the chaos of the city, and yet offers the individual freedom to exhibit more eccentric flair than may be permissible or socially acceptable in other areas of the country. It is precisely the city’s inherent theatrical nature that allows its actor-citizens to move between neutrality and expressivity, individualization and group belonging upon its public stage. In the city, committing to one’s public roles is essential to survival: “The characters who do not become self-conscious about their role-playing are crushed by the complexity and harshness of city life” (Sennett 1973).

For Sennett, the city and the theater face the same problem: that of audience.

How does one arouse belief in one’s projected image via appearance and immediate behavior amongst strangers? There is no certainty in physical appearance in the city.

Silence functions as the coping mechanism for modern street life, a type of “isolation in the midst of visibility” (Sennett 1976, 27). Thus, the gaze is not only one’s visual perception, but a reality in itself. “Our feeling for reality depends utterly upon appearance” (Arendt 1958, 50). To create belief, and thereby claim power, the individual must make herself credible via socially-initiated codes with which the audience is familiar. This project looks at the visual codes that operate in the modern city and explores the processes through which they are learned, as well as the rewards and consequences of one’s degree of proficiency – or lack thereof – in the metropolitan semiotic exchange.

6 Arjun Appadurai, interview by author, New York, NY, March 4, 2008. 12

Visual Sociology: Sociology through Fashion

As previously stated, this dissertation serves as a contribution to the emerging

field of visual sociology, including the sociology of fashion, in which fashion serves as a

paradigm for social interaction and organization. However, in opposition to Barthes’

argument that fashion is exclusively sociological, visual sociology is an interdisciplinary

pursuit that appeals not only to sociology but also philosophy, anthropology, psychology,

economics, political science, women’s studies, cultural studies, media studies, urban

studies – and the list continues to grow. Visual sociology is the sector of sociology that is

preoccupied with visual life and the way people use images (including images of

themselves) to present and understand themselves and their culture. The sub-discipline is

focused on three main approaches: 1) the inclusion of visual data as a companion to

ethnographic writing and recorded interviews, 2) the study of a culture’s products and

images of consumption, and 3) the use of visual media as a sociological apparatus for

understanding culture and for articulating sociological findings. 7 The visual, however, doesn’t easily lend itself to the discursive, and visual sociology, therefore, inevitably transcends traditional semiotic analysis, as it becomes increasingly difficult to provide a firm, unambiguous explanation of things; semiotics alone is too limiting for such multi- dimensional material. While semiotics is one tool I use, I also combine literary analysis, ethnography, personal interviews, and photography in an effort to understand and communicate the way in which reality is captured visually.

7 See http://www.visualsociology.org/ for more on visual sociology. 13

Methodology

This dissertation uses a theoretical base provided by those thinkers considered to be the “founders” of fashion studies and those individuals whose seminal ideas and works continue to provide an authoritative foundation for a dialogue on the triangular relationship between fashion, self-presentation, and power. From that theoretical base, I also incorporate more recent works on fashion, as well as articles from periodicals and contemporary information sources like blogs, etc., to use trends and current phenomena to illuminate the modern relevance of the foundational theories.

My research began in 2004 with ethnographic field research and interviews conducted for my MA thesis: “Rebellious Compliance: Living in the Cracks of Corporate

Dress Codes.” In this study, I looked at how professional institutions prescribe the interaction amongst its members, and thereby their images, and how those members constantly negotiate their own identities within the institution, above all through image management.

After the completion of “Rebellious Compliance,” I went on to interview 30 more individuals. The second round of interviews, however, was focused on four main groups: professional women, female socialites, 8 academics, and the arbiters of style who work

within the larger image industry (not all of which are mutually exclusive). These groups

8 I use the word “socialite” in reference to these women, because I know of no other term that more succinctly describes an upper-class person of social prominence. Its use is not in any way intended as a linguistic slight or a derogatory categorization. 14

facilitated my attempt to assemble practical, real-world examples of how dress impacts everyday life – and vice versa. I focused specifically on women (with regard to the professionals and socialites) as they are the traditional conspicuous consumers, the primary “first-adapters” to new trends, and the most accessible with respect to a dialogue on fashion and one’s visual awareness. In addition, females are perhaps the more intellectually interesting gender for analysis with regard to fashion and power. 9

The socialite group is divided into two sections: three are younger (around age

30) socialites who work as high-profile beauty executives in NYC, and five are older

(over age 40, into their 60’s) socialites, who have also had their own unique professional careers, but whose attention has, for the most part, now turned to other non-income generating activities 10 in NYC. 11 Three more are categorized strictly as professionals and work within prominent investment banks and financial services corporations in NYC.

Five of the interviewees are academics who have done research on topics that relate to the questions and issues addressed in this project. The image industry executives encompass the widest range of professional and personal backgrounds. Totaling 15 in all, I interviewed – in addition to the three socialites who work in the image industry – a veteran retailer, an accomplished fashion designer, a Dutch stylist/photographer duo, two

9 To be explored in Chapter 4, “Outfitting Success: Sex, Dress, and Professionalism.”

10 One exception to the professional/socialite category division is “Louise,” a woman whose social and professional prominence is evenly split. I will detail how she continues to thrive and dominate both spheres later in the text.

11 All of the socialites, despite their birthplace, are geographically and socially based in New York, with the exception of Timte, whose biographical details and relevance will be explained.

15

image consultants with different approaches to their field, two color forecasters with distinct specialties, a museum curator, a fashion writer, a plastic surgery and cosmetic enhancement consultant, and a corporate image and branding consultant.

The majority of the interviews were conducted in person, and all others took place

over the phone. All of the conversations were digitally recorded and later transcribed,

word-for-word. 12 I met each of the interviewees in a different manner. I knew only a few prior to embarking on this project. Some of the professional women and socialites were friends of friends, while others were referrals from other interviewees. I cold-called

(and persistently emailed) most of the image industry executives and academics, who finally agreed to speak with me based solely on their interest in the topic. All personal details and names are real, except when indicated. The main body of this text extracts relevant excerpts from these conversations for analysis, but their commentaries and personal stories are so rich, I’ve included each interview (edited, yet nearly in its entirety) in the appendix. 13

As a twist on the more conventional methods of participant observation, I

conducted a serial photography experiment, whereby I transformed my own visual self-

presentation and ventured out with a photographer into the New York City streets to

12 I allowed the interviewees to review the conversations after they were transcribed and permitted them to edit their responses or add-on however they saw fit. I do not believe this compromised the integrity of the initial interviews, but rather offered an on-going forum through which they could express their individual opinions and further reflect on the questions. Some submitted additional texts of essay-length, while others chose not to edit their initial responses at all. Nonsensical phrases and fillers like “um” have been deleted from the final transcripts, but all other words and opinions remain in tact, as expressed by the interviewees.

13 All of the interviews are cited at least once throughout the text, with the exception of Maria (a pseudonym), a teacher at a New York City private school, a transcript of which can be found in the appendix. 16

interact and observe in my altered state. Instead of disguising myself to gain access to a particular group, I staged a type of performance art whereby my projected identity was a pointed, strategic construction, intended to challenge the viewers’ perception of reality and reinforce the notion that fashion is social and cultural as a result of its constructed nature. These experiments further support my claim that one’s possible selves – once imagined and visually articulated – are equally or more potent than one’s biographical realities. Further, they depict the extent to which individuals may make the system work for them, not necessarily against them, despite the circumstances of their birth. The photographs of those performances, as well as the corresponding field notes, strengthen my argument and lend support to the overall project, as they demonstrate my capacity

(and incapacity, at times) to speak and seize power and social capital based on my appearance in each context.

I chose this particular combination of traditional and experimental sociological methods, because I believe this multi-dimensional topic and data could not be effectively and meaningfully gathered using conventional approaches alone. It is my hope that this interdisciplinary, multi-media approach will be embraced and applied to future projects within visual sociology.

17

A Note on the Social Origins of Dress

The first purpose of Clothes, as our Professor imagines, was not warmth or decency, but ornament…The first spiritual want of a barbarous man is Decoration . (Carlyle 1987, 30- 31)

Nature…ordains that human beings be completed by clothing, not left bare in their own insufficient skins. (Hollander 1994, 5)

I really do feel fashion is still much more a mediator, that it’s a form of costuming. It supports the drama of our lives. It’s theatrical garb for our personal narratives and identities. It’s Shakespeare: ‘All the world’s a stage,’ and as characters, some of us project ourselves through dress with more or less deftness, but in all instances, dress is costume. It’s very rarely purely functional. (Harold Koda 14 )

The social origin of dress is an ambiguous topic with two main theories surrounding it: the practical conclusion, that dress is a form of physical protection, which is rivaled by the more prevalent explanation of personal expression through bodily adornment. As cited above, Thomas Carlyle supports the adornment theory in Sartor

Resartus (1987), his work of fiction that conveys a vision of the universe, which he refers to as the “Clothes-Philosophy,” as conceived by his character, Professor Diogenes

Teufelsdrockh. Thorstein Veblen, Herbert Spencer, and Georg Simmel also subscribe to the idea that the practice of dressing stems from a desire to decorate the body. Veblen’s satirical, economical explanation of dress and the fashion system, The Theory of the

Leisure Class (1899 (2001)), reflects on the significance of adornment as the origin of dress. “For a creative principle, capable of serving as motive to invention and innovation in fashions, we shall have to go back to the primitive, non-economic motive with which apparel originated, – [ sic ] the motive of adornment” (Veblen 1899 (2001), 128). Veblen

14 Harold Koda, interview by author, New York, NY, February 1, 2007. 18

attributes the perpetual transience of fashion to a commitment to the human desire for improvement, namely, the compulsion to apply one’s workmanship to the perfection of beauty.

While Veblen is interested in the decorative lineage in dress, he concludes that the exact origins of dress are debatable and somewhat ancillary to his inquiry as, regardless of its origin, dress is no longer used primarily for protective measures, but rather to create and maintain respectability through its visual display. Other scholars are equally dismissive of any attempt to name the roots of dress and find it intellectually uninteresting and counter-productive to more pressing issues within fashion studies. Kim

Johnson, Susan Torntore, and Joanne Eicher (2003) contend that all theories on the origin of dress are mere speculation, as there is no real evidence to support any specific argument. Roland Barthes is similarly disinterested in the history of or original impulses behind fashion. Rather, his focus centers on its current significance and the semiotic relationship between the consumer and the garment, which he understands as inherently impure and always “represented” once it reaches the consumer. Barthes finds the decorative reasoning behind clothing to be problematic, and most significantly, thinks an inquiry into the origin of clothing looks at the wrong question.

What should be of interest to both historical and sociological researchers is not the transition from protection to decoration (this is an illusory transition) but the tendency of all bodily covering to insert itself into an organized, formal and normative system, which is recognized by society. (Barthes 1993, 744)

While Barthes differs from the overall analysis of fashion offered by Veblen and Simmel,

they converge on this crucial point: Fashion is a socially significant communication 19

system that operates on the microcosmic level with potent, global, collective consequences. It is to this point – and not a debate on the origins of dress – that this dissertation speaks. 20

CHAPTER 2

THE SOCIAL NATURE OF FASHION

4

[Daily Life] is not merely the sum of all daily doings, the dimension of banality and repetition: it is a system of interpretation. (Baudrillard 1998, 35)

Bodies without wrappings become entities devoid of signs of human order, and this is because clothes are the outward manifestation, the external condition, of our sociality, our ideals, or what Carlyle would call our “spirit.” (Carter 2003, 6) 15

I've always argued that dressing is very much a social act. The only time you're really dressing for yourself is in the privacy of your own home. And if what you're wearing then is what you decide to wear when you open the door, passing through that doorway is entering into a completely different sphere. Suddenly, how you're dressed becomes a statement, an expression of yourself. Even when that particular identity says, "I'm not part of the fashion system, I'm not interested," that, in itself, is an argument of a social

15 Inspired by this quote from Thomas Carlyle: “Man is a Spirit, and bound by invisible bonds to All Men…he wears Clothes which are visible emblems of that fact” (Carlyle 1987, p.48). 21

construction. So, whatever the originating impulse, democratic or elitist, gender-laden or ambiguous, conservative or transgressive…it's all a statement. (Harold Koda 16 )17

Fashion is a key component of everyday life. In order to understand fashion as a socially significant communication system, it is necessary to turn our attention to the politics around the public display of self: the public enactment of our communal and individual everyday lives, the manner in which we publicly present, distinguish, and strategically identify ourselves, of which dress plays a major role. Within this socially significant communication system, I am interested in the relationship between power, dress, and public appearance, which demands a working definition of the word “public” and its implications on dress and appearance. To explore this relationship, I am informed by the intellectual lineage of several thinkers: John Dewey, Hannah Arendt, Christopher

Lasch, and Richard Sennett, while Arendt’s work on the space of appearance within the public realm offers the most significant contribution and most critically complements my topic, as she speaks to how social appearance in the public realm can facilitate a claim to power. However, as they all inform each other, I will examine Dewey’s perspective first, as he sets the stage for the others.

For 20 th century philosopher and intellectual John Dewey (1954), the difference

between the public and private spheres cannot be reduced to the “social” factor. “The

distinction between private and public is…in no sense equivalent to the distinction

16 Harold Koda, interview by author, New York, NY, February 1, 2007. Koda is the curator of the Costume Institute at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. 17 While my interviewees are not experts in the field of socicology, they are professionals in their own respective areas, and I will use them as authoritative voices in their respective fields of expertise. Many also reflected on the topic of fashioning power during our interviews, and at times I will share their perspectives on that topic, with the understanding that those opinions do not carry the same weight as the studied writings and theories of other sociologists cited in this work. 22

between individual and social” (Dewey 1954, 13). Dewey supports this assertion by pointing out that many private occurrences are also social in nature. The impact of the social on the private sphere actively contributes to the increasingly indistinct line between what is privately sheltered from others and what is open to public scrutiny.

Building on this exploration of the public and social life, Richard Sennett investigates the historical lineage of the words “public” and “private” in The Fall of

Public Man (1976): “Public” was traditionally associated with the “common good” or

that which is open to general observation, while “private” referred to that which is

“privileged.” It is not until the end of the 17 th century that the terms are used in opposition, with “public” meaning “open to scrutiny by anyone,” and “private” as “the sheltered region of life that centered on family and friends” (Sennett 1976, 16). Similarly interested in the historical evolution of the public/private divide, Christopher Lasch, in

The Culture of Narcissism (1979), describes the urban 18 th century as a time “that did not

depend on intimacy…They shared a common fund of public signs which enabled people

of unequal ranks to conduct civilized conversation and to cooperate in public projects

without feeling called upon to expose their innermost secrets” (Lasch 1979, 65). It was a

time of an impersonal public, whereas the 19 th century, in contrast, ushered in a time

when “people came to believe that public actions revealed the inner personality of the

actor… [eroding] the boundary between public and private life. As the public world

came to be seen as a mirror of the self, people lost the capacity for detachment and hence

for playful encounter” (Lasch 1979, 65-66); “outward appearances, in this view, 23

involuntarily expressed the inner man” (Lasch 1979, 169). 18 It is through these social

transformations that both Sennett and Lasch come to identify the merging of the public

and private domains. 19

Most crucial to the topic of this dissertation, Hannah Arendt (1958) uses the term

“public realm” to refer to the public, social domain – a term I adopt and use throughout the text. She defines the public realm as “the space within the world which men need in order to appear at all” (Arendt 1958, 208). Her understanding of it is two-fold: 1)

“‘Public’ signifies the world itself, in so far as it is common to all of us and distinguished from our privately owned place in it” (Arendt 1958, 52), and 2)“Everything that appears in public can be seen and heard by everybody that has the widest possible publicity…Appearance – something that is being seen and heard by others as well as by ourselves – constitutes reality” (Arendt 1958, 50). Thus, Arendt’s public realm is integrally tied to social appearance – an appearance to both ourselves and to others – and consequently, to the power that is generated as a result of that witnessed appearance. It is to Arendt’s notion of the public realm that this dissertation will adhere. As for the nature of this power, Arendt argues that “power is always…a power potential and not an unchangeable, measurable, and reliable entity like force or strength” (Arendt 1958, 200).

‘Power’ is etymologically derived from the Latin potentia , which echoes Arendt’s

18 This phenomenon, referred to as “physiognomy,” will be more directly explored and made relevant to the subject later in the text.

19 Throughout his book, Sennett explores the economic and social transitions that instilled this public/private divide and which, subsequently, created confusion between the two spheres. The forces that led to this shift include the onset of capitalism, increased secularization, population transitions, an increase in international trade, the emergence of a new bourgeoisie class and a retreat from the feudal times that prefaced the 18 th century. 24

emphasis of its “potential” nature. Therefore, this social appearance in the public realm can facilitate a claim to power, but it must be maintained (a type of “image management,” as Goffman would call it), otherwise its potency may be fleeting.

Public Theatricality and Everyday Performances

5

The Tension between Group Belonging and Individual Differentiation

The enactment of everyday life is a social endeavor. Even in our most private of moments, we imagine, remember, and are influenced by the interactions in which we engage with others. This perma-social state contributes to ordered interaction and, as 25

Herbert Blumer (1969) illuminates, the fusion of disparate, yet actively conjoined, human lives. “The life of any human society consists necessarily of an ongoing process of fitting together the activities of its members” (Blumer 1969, 7). For symbolic interactionists like Blumer, the crucial element in the fabric of society is the semiotic interaction that occurs between individuals and breathes life into the collective social organism.

Symbolic interactionism does not merely give a ceremonious nod to social interaction. It recognizes social interaction to be of vital importance in its own right. This importance lies in the fact that social interaction is a process that forms human conduct instead of being merely a means or a setting for the expression or release of human conduct. (Blumer 1969, 8)

The individual engages with a world that demands constant interpretation, not simply an

instinctive response, and this process of interpretation requires an ongoing negotiation

with one’s conception of self within the community. As Arjun Appadurai rephrases it,

this core sociological understanding of the birth of the self stems from a social

interactionism in which “I become me, because I know you, and you become you,

because you know me” (Arjun Appadurai 20 ).

Even before we reconcile it to our consciousness, we are impulsively acting in a manner that will maintain and build our social – and therefore biological – equity. Our social interaction is a sophisticated survival tool. This theory echoes Emile Durkheim’s belief that the social is the foundation of the human condition and, like Blumer, his conception of social order is based upon mutual interdependence. We rely on and act in service to one another because of our individuality, not our commonality. Berger and

Luckmann rework Durkheim’s belief in the primacy of the collective over the individual

20 Arjun Appadurai, interview by author, New York, NY, March 4, 2008.

26

in The Social Construction of Reality : “The individual…is born with a predisposition

toward sociality, and he becomes a member of society” (Berger and Luckmann 1967,

129); “Identity is…formed…, maintained, modified, [and] reshaped by social relations”

(Berger and Luckmann 1967, 173). Berger and Luckmann support my claim that an

individual must “earn” his identity through social interaction – a large part of which is

transmitted visually.

Durkheim believes that one’s personality is a reflection of a socialized individual.

The manner in which these interconnected personalities conduct themselves and the

variation that exists amongst the chorus of I’s is explored by David Riesman in The

Lonely Crowd (1969). Riesman develops a typology between what he refers to as tradition-directed, inner-directed, and other-directed individuals. These typologies serve as forms of Weberian ideal-types and are therefore merely pure types, not actual individuals found in reality. Riesman envisions the other-directed individual as the new dominant type within modern, Western society, 21 and this new outer-directed society

breeds a type of conformity amongst the masses. “What is common to all other-directed

people is that their contemporaries are the source of direction for the individual”

(Riesman 1969, 21). Hence, modern man, consumed by the spectacular world of

appearances in which he lives and operates, is driven by the acceptance he seeks to gain

from visible conformity to his peers. The other-directed individual connects with himself

21 Riesman does not explicitly state how the inner-directed individual came to dominate, but does follow “Max Weber’s lead in seeing the Protestant Ethic as linking a Greek type of rationality to a Judeo-Christian type of this-worldly morality” (Riesman 1969, xxxvii).

27

through the reflection of how he imagines others’ view of him. He invests in this performance of self that is enacted for and received by the gaze of those around him, as one’s everyday life transforms into a socially-consumable and socially-constituted object.

The increasing outlets for individual appearance and performance upon the public

stage, as well as the level of import assigned to these appearances, indicates that we are,

as Riesman suggests, more other-directed than ever, which revitalizes Durkheim’s

approach to culture – in which society acts ceremonially in search of symbolic meaning

in social interaction. 22 This theory is translated into the everyday by Erving Goffman in

works like Interaction Ritual (1967), where he invokes the Durkheimian spirit, in

particular, to explore “some of the senses in which the person in our urban secular world

is allotted a kind of sacredness that is displayed and confirmed by symbolic acts”

(Goffman 1967, 47). Goffman analyzes society as a complexity of interconnected

ceremonies in which every person participates and, through that participation, acquires

symbolic definition and social significance. Goffman speaks of this interaction in a

methodical, ritualistic sense:

For a complete man to be expressed, the individual must hold hands in a chain of ceremony, each giving deferentially with proper demeanor to the one on the right what will be received deferentially from the one on the left…It is therefore important to see that the self is in part a ceremonial thing. (Goffman 1967, 85, 91)

It is the visual, social presentation of the self that is his main interest, and of prime

interest to this project. Goffman focuses on human interaction in an effort to understand

its contribution to the creation of the social dynamic. The dramaturgical approach to

22 See Emile Durkheim (1995), The Elementary Forms of Religious Life , for further commentary on the ceremonially nature of everyday life. 28

human interaction is reminiscent of Arendt’s argument that social reality is reconstituted with the performance of each “scene” within the human drama. The visual impressions we give off are central to the communal theatrical production in which we all play a part and all seek to be heard. However, while Goffman’s contribution is extremely valuable, he fails to analyze the affect of the performance of self on the social order. A task this dissertation adapts.

Goffman’s ceremonial approach to human interaction offers the potential for personal redefinition and gives a cause-and-effect logic to ritualized exchange, which is central to successful image management. If one acts in X manner, then one will be treated in Y manner. There is an order to the ceremonial structure, so one can achieve a certain status through the careful study of symbolic interpretation. “In all societies, rules of conduct tend to be organized into codes which guarantee that everyone acts appropriately and receives his due” (Goffman, 1967, 55). This creates what Goffman terms a type of information game in which impression management is essential if one hopes to maintain status and/or excel. Knowing he is actively observed, the individual may alter his appearance, relying upon the application of the cause-and-effect rules and thereby calculating his observers’ interpretations. He gives off informal visual cues and unofficial communication (i.e. context-appropriate attire) that may lead to initiation into and potency within various groups.

Both Goffman and George Herbert Mead use the metaphor of “playing games” to illustrate the nature of human interaction. In Mind, Self, and Society (1967), Mead argues that the individual must take on the attributes of the generalized other – an individual that 29

represents the attitude of the larger community – and follow the rules of the game to become a fully developed self. These rules are perpetuated as individuals infallibly continue to participate as players in the game. “The game is then an illustration of the situation out of which an organized personality arises” (Mead 1967, 159). The individual assimilates the community into his person, thereby acquiring a personality, which he did not previously possess. For Mead, man is a process, a long-term project of self- actualization through the development of new self-appointed identities and roles. “The essence of the self…is cognitive: it lies in the internalized conversation of gestures which constitutes thinking, or in terms of which thought or reflection proceeds. And hence the origin and foundations of the self, like those of thinking, are social” (Mead 1967, 173).

Thus, one’s identity is grounded in the accumulation of social interaction.

Part of this social game involves a demonstration of one’s group belonging.

“Deference and demeanor practices must be institutionalized so the individual will be

able to project a viable, sacred self and stay in the game on a proper ritual basis”

(Goffman 1967, 91). Goffman argues that the individual continues to seek both group

belonging and personal expression. “The individual is formed by groups, identifies with

groups, and wilts away unless he obtains emotional support from groups” (Goffman

1961, 319). Goffman speaks to the primal instinct to belong and the role that social

groups play in that quest to unite with something larger than one’s self. However, this

propensity toward inclusion does not exclude the individual desire to distinguish.

“Embracement of the unit is not all that we see. We always find the individual

employing methods to keep some distance, some elbow room, between himself and that 30

with which others assume he should be identified” (Goffman 1961, 319). Thus, Goffman argues that there exists an inherent tension between the two instincts and that it is

“against something” that the individual emerges:

Without something to belong to, we have no stable self, and yet total commitment and attachment to any social unit implies a kind of selflessness. Our sense of being a person can come from being drawn into a wider social unit; our sense of selfhood can arise through the little ways in which we resist the pull. Our status is backed by the solid buildings of the world, while our sense of personal identity often resides in the cracks. (Goffman 1961, 320)

Similarly, Georg Simmel, who supports my argument that we may understand the structure through which fashion operates as the mode of functioning for all human groupings and position fashion as a paradigm for human behavior and social interaction

(Simmel 1971, 294, 296, 305), looks at fashion through this relationship between the freedom for individual expression and the pressure toward group conformity. Simmel focuses on the German tradition within the sociology of fashion by examining personal freedom in popular culture. In much the same way that Friedrich Vischer uses Georg

W.F. Hegel to establish his aesthetic theory, 23 Simmel turns to Immanuel Kant to explore the “socializing force of fashion” (Simmel 1971, 302) and to ask if fashion is expression or slavery – to which he concludes: It is both.

Man’s desire to please his social environment contains two contradictory tendencies, in whose play and counterplay in general, the relations among individuals take their course. On the one hand, it contains kindness, a desire of the individual to give the other joy; but on the other hand, there is the wish for this joy and these ‘favours’ [ sic ] to flow back to him, in the form of recognition and esteem. (Simmel 1997, 206)

A fashionable individual is envied as an icon of style and applauded for his ability to conform to the group. Thus, an inner turmoil builds in the conflicted eye of the viewer,

23 See Hegel (1975), “On Drapery,” from Aesthetics , and Vischer (1879), “Fashion and Cynicism.” 31

as she perceives the fashionable person as both an object of envy and affinity. It is a delicate balance between individual differentiation and communal belonging, both of which are essential to one’s social success. All of society operates on this dualism between individualism and group belonging, with fashion as one of its most significant manifestations and indicators. Later in the text, I use the term “distinguished compliance” to describe this attempt to balance this dualism.

Strategic Masking and Claims to Authenticity

6

The information game process that is perpetuated through a strategic fashioning of the body is a cycle of concealment and continual revelations in which we all wear a mask and play a role, even to ourselves. “This mask represents the conception we have formed of ourselves – the role we are striving to live up to – this mask is our truer self, the self we would like to be” (Goffman 1959, 19). This masking process offers a 32

dramatic visual presentation of the self which elicits a psychological and social reaction from the viewer/audience, as well as from the individual actor. The actor maintains what

Goffman refers to as his personal front, particularly through attention to his appearance, as the audience has faith in the visual presentation set before them, and assigns or withdraws power accordingly. “The self, then, as a performed character, is not an organic thing that has a specific location, whose fundamental fate is to be born, to mature, and to die; it is a dramatic effect arising diffusely from a scene that is presented”

(Goffman 1959, 252). This act is performed for an audience in an attempt to appeal to their sensibilities and advance one’s “maximization game.” I believe these masks are not false, but rather different representations of the “real” person. This raises the issue of authenticity in appearance and self-presentation, which will be explored throughout the dissertation.

The notion of masking is similarly addressed by Marcel Mauss in The Category of

the Person (1985 (1938)). For Mauss, the self is both “absorbed in his clan but already

detached from it in the ceremonial by the mask” (Mauss 1985 (1938), 6). The mask is

worn by the person or self in the role ( personnage ) he plays in the multitude of his life’s dramas. Masks are thus faces, not disguises, which reveal one facet of the personality and yet disclose another. Sennett makes a similar argument with respect to the notion of masking, as it relates to normative behavior in social intercourse: “Wearing a mask is the essence of civility. Masks permit pure sociability, detached from the circumstances of power, malaise, and private feeling of those who wear them. Civility has as its aim the shielding of others from being burdened with oneself” (Sennett 1976, 264). Thus, the 33

mask both represents and protects the individual while it socially negotiates on the individual’s behalf.

One may turn to the continually evolving shifts in public dress as a visible sign of the changing rules of public expression and appropriateness. The 17 th century saw the same clothing worn both publicly and privately, while the 18 th century distinguished

public clothing as that which indicated class and marked one’s place in society. 18 th

century laws demanded that individuals (particularly women) of different social classes

dress accordingly. The public arena came to be known as the immoral domain, which

meant the potential for disgrace for women, and indicated freedom for men (Sennett

1976, 23). However, these laws were not enforced; no one knew who was dressed

“appropriately” and in accordance with their individual circumstances, which leads

Sennett to ask, “Was what the observer saw on the street then an illusion?” (Sennett

1976, 66). This game of illusion persists on

the modern urban streets, as it continues to

challenge audience perceptions of reality, as

will be explored throughout this text via the

field experiments.

The question of appropriateness in 7 public behavior is evocative of Erving Goffman’s notions of the front and back stages, as

he presents them in The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (1959). That which is

meant for public viewing is described as the front region or “front stage,” whereas that

which does not keep with the norms of society, is not as polished, or might offend a 34

general audience is relegated to the “back stage.” Goffman stresses the importance of controlling access between these two regions through the visible engagement of one’s role:

When individuals witness a show that was not meant for them, they may…become disillusioned...The answer to this problem is for the performer to segregate his audiences so that the individuals who witness him in one of the roles will not be the individual who witnesses him in another of his roles. (Goffman 1959, 137)

Thus, is one merely acting in social settings? Are public behaviors ever “authentic”?

What constitutes authenticity in expression? I argue that one’s authenticity in self-

presentation is not the pertinent issue. Rather, it is valuable to look at the variety of sides

of the same self that are presented in a multitude of social circumstances, what Berger

and Luckmann refer to as the “social self” (Berger and Luckmann 1967, 73). What is

socially enacted is, in a sense, both pure artifice and essentially real, and yet, one may

argue that all behavior, that of both the front and back stages, is affected, insofar as it is

socially constructed.

The question of authenticity in self-presentation is further explored by Pierre

Bourdieu in Distinction (1984). Influenced by Norbert Elias, Goffman, Kant, and Weber,

Bourdieu uses the French context to illuminate global patterns of human behavior. 24 The book attempts to address some of Kant’s questions by “seeking in the structure of the social classes the basis of the systems of classification which structure perception of the social world and designate the objects of aesthetic enjoyment” (Bourdieu 1984, xiv).

24 In defense of his choice to do an ethnographic study of France, Bourdieu recalls a conversation he once had with Erving Goffman, in which Goffman “pointed out to me, the Parisian version of the art of living has never ceased to exert a sort of fascination in the ‘anglo-Saxon’ world, even beyond the circle of snobs and socialites, thereby attaining a kind of universality” (Bourdieu 1984, xi).

35

Bourdieu gives a Goffmanian commentary on the theatricality of bourgeois self- presentation:

Being so linked to appearance – the one he has to give, not only to do his job, that is, play his role, to ‘make believe,’ to inspire confidence or respect and present his social character, his ‘presentation,’ as a guarantee of the products or services he offers…, but also to assert his pretensions and demands, to advance his interests and upward aspirations – the petit bourgeois is inclined to a…vision of the social world [that reduces] it to a theatre in which being is never more than perceived being, a mental representation of a theatrical performance (représentation )…Everything predisposes him to perceive the social world in terms of appearance and reality. (Bourdieu 1984, 253-254)

Bourdieu’s commentary is valuable to

this dissertation as he conceptualizes of

the individual as a witnessed

representation, in which appearances

inform reality, not vice versa. I apply

this notion of witnessed representation

to Arendt’s ideas about the space of

appearance, which I extend not only to

an appearance = reality equation, but

also an appearance = power formula for

8 the negotiation of social capital. The politics which surround the reception and perception of these projected images is the

subject of the following chapters, as this inquiry now springs from its established

theoretical base toward more contemporary, concrete case studies of the fashion/power

relationship. 36

Part II

Empirical Research and Findings

37

CHAPTER 3

MEDITATED FASHION: THE POLITICS OF SEEING AND BEING SEEN

9 The Universe itself…is nothing but a garment which makes the Invisible visible . (Laver 1949, 12).

Appearance, whether we like it or not, has become the coin of the realm, the locus of our conversation: in our image-saturated, relentlessly scrutinizing Visual Age, we trade in it. (Merkin 2007)

Fashion is powerless if it is not seen. Thus, seeing and being seen is integral to

any attempt to carve a space of appearance within the public realm. This witnessed

appearance is constantly mediated and informed by a multitude of variables, several of

which I will explore in this chapter. Through an examination of the power of color, the

visible self in an urban landscape, and the role of new media in identify formation and 38

self-presentation, I investigate the ever-evolving lens through which fashion is mediated within the public realm and power is assigned.

In my field experiment as a tourist, I put a

twist on my usual everyday appearance in

an effort to gauge its affect on my ability to

see and be seen on the New York City

streets:

Field experiment: Tourist Date: June 10, 2007

I ♥ NY: Tales of a Reluctant Tourist 10 I hate being a tourist. They’re inherently clumsy in attempts to negotiate public transportation, never seem to master the local aesthetic, and tend to champion the city’s attractions that most urban residents avoid with a disdain comparable to their feelings on acid- washed denim. My apartment is situated in Hell’s Kitchen, a relatively non-touristy section of Manhattan, given its close proximity to the Theater District and the mother of all tourist destinations, Times Square. Perhaps it’s the blinders we apply as a daily survival tactic, but I feel confident in saying that my neighbors and I travel through the space without giving much time or attention to the red double-decker tour buses or street-corner hawkers. They’re like radio static that becomes visual white noise: They fade into the background, while we focus on more personally-relevant places and people. And yet, ironically, my decision to assume the role of a New York City tourist excited me. It was my chance to wander in wide-eyed awe without so much as a hint of self-consciousness. I had given myself permission to be hopelessly un-hip, and I couldn’t wait. I knew my outfit needed some basic elements that would scream, “Please treat me like a tourist!” to be effective. I headed straight for one of the many camera/tourist paraphernalia shops in Midtown Manhattan and chose A&S Photo on the corner of Lexington and 55 th Street simply because of its proximity to my office. It advertises its expertise in cameras, audio, video, TVs, cell phones, computers, sunglasses, watches, and Samsonite luggage – all at discounted 39

prices. I was clothed in a summer dress and heels, so they didn’t necessarily assume I was a tourist when I walked into the store. My goal was to keep the tourist-garb spending to a minimum (as I couldn’t imagine an occasion on which I’d wear any of it again). “Where are your cheapest t-shirts?” I asked bluntly. “They’re all the same price – $9.99,” one of the many lurking, male store clerks responded. “And how much are the hats?” I inquired. “$9.99,” he repeated. “Ohhhh…I think maybe you guys are too expensive for me. I’m only looking for really cheap stuff.” One never exits those stores without multiple protests and desperate pleas from the well- trained workers, so I began to explain to the youngest clerk, who appeared to be the manager, that I wasn’t a tourist but needed the outfit for a photo shoot. He loved the idea and immediately assigned himself a mission to find the most obnoxious items in the store, and he promised to give me a discount (on the already “discounted” prices). He selected a pink “I ♥ NY” t-shirt and a pink, red, white, and blue baseball hat with “NYC” and a picture of the Statue of Liberty stitched in multiple places around the cap. My special price was $15 total, which suited me just fine. I opted for a children’s size large, which was still several times larger than any t-shirt I currently own. The key accessory I still needed to acquire was the requisite tourist fanny-pack. They had a few “nice” ones, but again, I just couldn’t rationalize any type of financial investment in the most universally-loathed carrying-case ever created. “What’s wrong with this one?” he asked, holding up a sturdy, red canvas fanny-pack. “It’s perfect,” I said, “But it’s $20. I really don’t want to spend that much on it. I guess I’ll have to go down to Chinatown in search of some cheaper options.” “I’ll give you everything for $20,” he said, without hesitation. “It’ll save you from running all over town.” “Really?” I asked in shock. “That’s so nice. Thank you!” I attributed his generosity to one of three things: 1) the “discounted” prices were so inflated that he could give me a 50% discount on the purchases and still make a profit, 2) he appreciated how I was using the items he secretly hated, and got a kick out of facilitating it, or 3) the fanny-pack had been rotting there for years and he was simply happy to get it out of the store. I’m guessing it was a combination of all three. In preparation for my day as a tourist, I visited several websites that offer do’s and don’ts on how to avoid looking like a tourist and how to attempt to look like a New Yorker. eHow.com (“How To Do Just About Everything”) gives step-by-step instructions, with an assigned difficulty rating of “easy.” I failed to do nearly all of them, which I hoped would, in turn, make me look more like a tourist and less like a New Yorker: They recommend neutral colors and black; I wore pink and red. They suggest comfortable walking shoes, but warn against athletic shoes, especially ones with logos; I wore white Nike sneakers (that I would normally reserve exclusively for the gym). eHow says that nylon messenger-type shoulder bags are best; I opted for the red fanny pack. Shorts, especially those more than 3 inches above the knee, are discouraged and should be avoided altogether in cities like New York; I wore tight, above-the-knee biking shorts. And finally, it advises that visitors avoid wearing clothing that promotes the city they’re in; I knew my “I ♥ New York” t-shirt would be just perfect. I pulled my hair back into a low ponytail that fit neatly within the size-adjustment hole in the back of the hat and put on some small, gold hoop earrings and a thin gold chain that tucked into my t-shirt. The eHow guide does suggest that female travelers consider wearing a wedding ring (because no one would steal from or attack a married person?), and I decided that I would indeed “be married” and placed a simple gold band on my left ring-finger – not in an effort to ward off pick-pockets, but rather to look more traditional (not because wedding rings are necessarily, decidedly un- 40

New-Yorker-like, but because it reinforced the overall image). The look was finished-off with a faded denim jacket tied around my waist, just under the fanny-pack. Darren, my photographer, wore a matching “I ♥ NY” t-shirt in blue, some khaki shorts, and American flag Converse sneakers. We established our biographies: he was a photographer by profession (the obvious choice, plus we needed something to explain his advanced equipment), and I was a fifth grade teacher. We met at the University of Iowa, married after college, and still live in Iowa. We began our tourist adventure down my street, 46 th Street, which becomes “Restaurant Row” between 8 th and 9 th Avenues. As we walked I could feel my posture transform. My everyday movement sways a bit from side-to-side as I walk forward, but my new persona seemed to inspire a more up-and-down, bouncy physicality. I was practically marching, arms swinging briskly, with an enormous grin planted permanently on my face. We crossed to a stop on the double-decker tour bus which is located at the corner of 47 th Street and 8 th Avenue. I approached one of the ticket sellers and inquired about the route, which earned me several flashy tour bus maps and a thorough explanation of the routes and prices.

11

Armed with some new tourist flair, we journeyed on to Times Square with the youthful eagerness of a child experiencing Disney World for the first time. An Asian woman immediately approached me and offered to draw my picture: it would take only 5 minutes and cost a mere $5 – an offer I couldn’t refuse. The sketching process was fascinating on many levels. First, it allowed me a brief opportunity to physically plant myself at the center of the tourist traffic and observe how they reacted to me. Second, it implemented a third-party interpretation of my appearance/projected identity, which I was then able to take home. Third, it offered a rich landscape for Darren to photograph: others observing me, me observing them, and the artist depicting her rendition of it all. I kept my perma-grin firmly planted and many tourists stopped to watch at length; one even commented to my “husband” on my big smile. They all seemed to 41

delight in my apparent delight – delight over what? My soon-to-be-completed caricature? Being in the City? Being on display? It didn’t really matter what the impetus. They sensed the enthusiasm and responded accordingly, affected by the energy. However, I’m fairly certain no New York City residents stopped to gawk or comment. It was only the tourists, who had formed their own nation of commonality and camaraderie. They were bound less by what they were than by what they weren’t: New York City residents. All other biographical details were superfluous to this bond. My caricature complete, I stood up to view the personalized souvenir of my fake identity, only to find that she’d decided to forego the t-shirt/fanny-pack/shorts ensemble and instead dressed me in a cleavage-enhancing evening gown (but she did retain the baseball cap, perhaps because she had no idea what my hair looked like underneath it). I was admittedly disappointed that my attempt to purchase an artistic preservation of my stint as a tourist was shunned in favor of faux-glamour. Evidently, even the people who earn a living off tourists want them to spiff up their image. I couldn’t completely blame her. They attempted to sell me a frame to preserve the delicate portrait, promising that it would be ruined from smudging if I was too cheap to spend $15 on the frame, but I took my chances. We wandered into the Hershey’s store for a few quick photo ops with bags of Hershey’s kisses, and then headed a block south to the island that separates Broadway and 7 th Avenue. The Naked Singing Cowboy is a regular presence, but that day it was the Naked Singing Cowgirl who was doing more naked exhibitionism than she was singing. For $5 you could pose with her and take one “normal” photo, then one “kissing” photo, where the Naked Singing Cowgirl kisses you on your cheek (you are strictly instructed to continue to look forward, so as to avoid any unwanted lip- action). Flashing my biggest perma-grin yet, I marched up to her and awkwardly posed, ready for my photo. She had long, wavy blonde hair and, in addition to the guitar slung across her, wore only an aqua, lamé tube top as a skirt (butt cheeks half- revealed), some flower pasties, and cowboy boots (which served as her personal “tip-jars”). She put her arm around my shoulder. Her skin was soft, she smelled nice, and she told my “husband” I was pretty. I guess that’s worth $5. Adjacent to the Naked Singing Cowgirl was what seemed to be a woman of an indecipherable age dressed as the Statute of Liberty. Painted green and wearing a sheet and a crown, she silently advertised $3 12 photos with a cardboard sign at her feet. I paid my $3 and was given a torch and draped in the American flag. The photo was snapped, and I handed the torch to the next customer. I decided to complete my Times Square adventure with a few other traditional tourist moves: an examination of a sprawling subway map in the middle of the sidewalk, lots of upward staring, a photo op with a willing police officer, and another photo with a woman in a short red, 42

white, and blue jumper (whose colors were meant to evoke the Puerto Rican flag, as opposed to the American flag, as she was on her way back from the Puerto Rican Day Parade). We made our way into the subway – with appropriate awkwardness in purchasing a ticket and moving through the turnstiles – and stopped to gawk at the subway performers momentarily, before heading to the N/R/Q/W line. I asked several people if they knew which trains stopped at Union Square, and a few directed me to the map behind me, while another confirmed that the Q would take me to my destination. At Union Square we transferred to the L, a train that perhaps sees fewer tourists than most others on its passages to and from Williamsburg, Brooklyn. The closer the train got to Brooklyn, the more disdain I could feel. The hipster eyes stared in confusion and annoyance as we loudly discussed how cool we would be for venturing to Williamsburg. My enthusiastic posing under the “L Train” sign did nothing to help my reputation – though it was great fun. I was a tourist, and perhaps the best part of being a tourist is the license to be deliciously oblivious to disapproving stares, wayward glances, and mocking comments. If only we all had a little more tourist in us.

13

My sartorial conversion to a New York tourist redefined my place in the urban social

strata, while my actual persona and biographical details remained the same. But before I

investigate the significance of the street in one’s negotiation for a space of appearance, I 43

want to highlight the role of color, as it is a central building block and component of all visual self-presentation.

The Cunning of Color

The meaning of one’s visual self-presentation and the perspective from which one views it are both partial to and contingent upon the gaze of the viewer. John Berger

(1972) asserts that the relationship between vision and words is a complex negotiation in which little is obvious and nothing is absolute: “It is seeing which establishes our place in the surrounding world; we explain that world with words…The relation between what we see and what we know is never settled…[There is an] always-present gap between words and seeing” (Berger 1972, 7). He understands “the gaze” to be more influential than language. “Soon after we can see, we are aware that we can also be seen…The reciprocal nature of vision is more fundamental than that of spoken dialogue” (Berger

1972, 9). This mutual seeing can validate or diminish one’s vision of herself, and thus, the potency of her projected image.

Perhaps the most basic element of seeing is processing color. “Color in dress is…like the tone of voice in speech in that it can completely alter the meaning of what is

‘said’ by other aspects of the costume” (Lurie 2000, 182). Colors, however, process in the brain more quickly than words (Maurstad 2007). Thus, I have included the commentaries of two color specialists, as they offer insight into the role of color in visual self-presentation – which in turn affects the reception of that presentation by the public realm. Margaret Walch of the Color Association of the United States and Jack 44

Bredenfoerder of the Color Marketing Group argue that color’s visual brawn is integral to any serious examination of the relationship between dress and power.

Jack Bredenfoerder is a color design consultant who researches color design trends and develops, directs, and facilitates color strategies for Landor Associates, a global brand strategy and design company. He is also the president of the Color

Marketing Group (CMG), a non-profit organization that encourages members to share their general impressions of what will influence color, adapting the tagline, “The right color sells better.” For CMG, color is a strategy that is influenced by multiple factors; it is both qualitative and emotional, and individuals have differing color instincts. CMG refers to their predictions as “forecasts,” as opposed to “palettes,” as palettes are collections of colors intended to coordinate in some manner, while a forecast explores general color directions, without regard for how the colors complement one another. 25

“The majority of our members are…designers that use color to get the most out of that

aspect of the product. [Color is] the spice of design. You can season the design with

it…It’s the first thing people notice and the last thing they think about before they

purchase…It is extremely important” (Jack Bredenfoerder 26 ).

25 Color forecasting is not a science, and Bredenfoerder invoked 9/11 as an example of an instance where they read the event incorrectly. Their forecasts over-compensated for the event, forecasting an onslaught of darker colors, while the masses rejected the dark colors in an effort to “stay bright.”

26 Jack Bredenfoerder, phone interview by author, May 4, 2007.

45

14

Margaret Walch is the Director of the Color Association of the United States

(CAUS), the oldest color forecasting company in the U.S. CAUS was founded in 1915 as the Textile Color Card Association of the United States. They issue forecasts in four different areas: women’s fashion, men’s clothing, youth fashions, and interior design, and hold all the US military standards and all the standards for the textile industry in the

United States (see CAUS’s spring/summer 2008 color forecast above). Walch’s particular area of expertise is in historical and contemporary palettes. CAUS is currently attempting to link color trends with socio-historical patterns:

We’ve embarked on a project where we’ll categorize by hue, the colors by the season and the color cycle and the decade on the theory that…in depressions and recessions, women tend to 46

dress in oranges and reds. While, in good economic times, they tend to dress in blues. Patriotic colors. Nature versus façade is an interesting duality concept. (Margaret Walch 27 )

CAUS’s project speaks to the power of color and the role it plays in cultural understanding and communication, suggesting that color preferences and potencies are anything but random. Many people are exploring and considering the social repercussions of the biological and physiological affects of certain colors. Walch believes that for every color there exists an opposing emotion that is culturally and contextually contingent:

Red has physical aspects of the color that it will increase your blood pressure and heart beat. But, emotionally, it can mean love and passion and hate and war. So you can see two polar opposites. Like brown, it can be this comforting color, but it can also look dirty…It varies from culture to culture, too…What’s interesting is these cultures are starting to cross- pollinate in the world. We’re starting to see these paradigm shifts. (Margaret Walch 28 )

Pink, while part of the red family, has the opposite effect on viewers. According to Dr.

Alexander Schauss of the American Institute of Biosocial Research, pink has a mellowing effect and has been found to reduce antagonism in jails. Dr Schauss said in a recent interview that “even if a person tries to be angry or aggressive in the presence of pink, he can’t. The heart muscles can’t race fast enough. It’s a tranquilizing color that saps your energy” (Rotstein 2006). Pink is one of the colors that has participated in this widespread paradigm shift to which Walch refers, thanks in large part to its adaptation by the breast cancer awareness campaign, which has transformed it from a symbol of feminine frivolity to one of solidarity amongst women. However, it was not always a feminine color. According to Jack Bredenfoerder, pink has a masculine lineage

27 Margaret Walch, interview by author, New York, NY, May 15, 2007.

28 Margaret Walch, interview by author, New York, NY, May 15, 2007. 47

(precisely because of its relationship to red) and it was used in military uniforms up until

Victorian times. Concurrently, blue was considered a color of pure chastity and therefore associated with women, thereby reinforcing the notion that, while color stimuli may affect the brain universally, gender associations with color are indeed culturally and socially constructed.

The politicization of color, particularly within the United States, has become an emotionally-charged media sport. Since the 2000 presidential election, Republican dominated states are referred to as “red states,” while those controlled by the Democrats are considered to be “blue states.” Bredenfoerder expressed his surprise in those color assignations: red was considered the color of change and traditionally associated with communism, therefore it was frequently linked with the Democrats, while the

Republicans were viewed as the stable, conservative party, which more naturally aligned with blue. During the 2000 presidential election, however, it switched. George Bush’s campaign elected to use red for its publicity signage, while Al Gore’s campaign used blue. The networks adapted those respective colors to indicate the states in which each party dominated during that election, and perhaps due in part to the duration of that race, in addition to the increased visibility of the maps as a result of the drawn-out process, the colors assignments have since stuck and become ingrained in the minds of the American people.

The politics around color – its use and perception – affect one’s social sight and interaction in every facet of daily life. It quite literally colors our vision, thereby facilitating the formation of social groups and collective differentiation. One of the most 48

striking and immediate situations in which one’s ability to appear with symbolically potent plumage, in an effort to see and be seen, is tested on the urban city street, as is explored in the following section. 49

Street Cred: Physiognomy and Urban Tribalism

1 5

Every sidewalk is a runway – Is your hair ready? (TRESemmé advertisement, seen on a New York City taxi, January 23, 2006)

It is commonly believed that the street influences the runway – not vice versa.

“The runway is the exaggeration of street fashion,”29 argues designer Alexander Julian. 30

Given Samuel Simon Witte’s conceptualization of fashion as a mediator between the

29 Alexander Julian, interview by author, New York, NY, June 21, 2007.

30 Alexander has more than 30 years in the design industry. He is a five-time Coty Award winner (which is considered the highest praise awarded in fashion) and the youngest designer ever inducted into the Coty Award Hall of Fame. He has been placed on the International Best Dressed List (an award now issued by Vanity Fair magazine) nine times. Alexander was the first American fashion designer to create his own exclusive fabrics, and his textile design is now a part of the Smithsonian’s permanent collection. He is perhaps best known for his men’s sportswear collection, “Colours by Alexander Julian.” Over the years, he has branched out into home products and is the first fashion designer to receive the Pinnacle Award from the American Society of Furniture Designers. 50

individual and the public, the urban street is not only an arbiter of runway style, but also the means through which individuals are socially understood. In “The Politics of

Appearance” (2007), Daphne Merkin explains the emphasis on the external as a compensation for the inaccessibility of the internal: “It is precisely because our interior selves are essentially inscrutable…that we depend so much on surface clues. The whole superficial shebang…provides us with the contextual tools to read the Other, the person who is not us” (Merkin 2007). Merkin’s commentary highlights the significance of visual details we might instinctually dismiss as merely “superficial,” such as the use and appearance of color, as previously demonstrated. These details test our ability to “read the Other,” as Merkin puts it. One’s facility with these visual clues is perhaps tested most readily on the urban street, where contextual clues and superficial surfaces facilitate the establishment of one’s “street cred,” as the audience must decipher invisible truths, and one’s ability to gauge “authentic” neediness is tested – a challenge I explored in my field experiment as a homeless person on the New York City streets: 51

Field Experiment: Homeless Date: August 12, 2007

16

Staged Neediness, Impromptu Pity

Poverty is not something that one easily imitates. Dressing up like a tourist or a wealthy person comes more naturally, with fewer ethical issues and a sense of playfulness. You don’t wonder if a socialite on the Upper East Side is going to be offended by your fake diamond ring, or whether a tourist would understand the irony of your “I ♥ NY” t-shirt, as opposed to the genuine enthusiasm with which she wears hers. But you do wonder if someone who sleeps on the streets might see your strategically ripped clothing and nutmeg-rubbed face and feel disgusted – not by your unkempt physicality, but by your character. If they recognize it as a costume, that is. I had already decided to donate any money that I received to someone who appeared legitimately down-and-out, so the ethical issues around begging for money didn’t plague me. Yes, I would be presenting myself under false pretenses and taking advantage of the generosity of others, but ultimately I would not financially benefit from it, so I decided to go ahead with the experiment. One of the city’s largest donation centers and Salvation Army shops is on my street, W. 46 th St., so that seemed like a natural starting point to begin piecing together my outfit. However, I’d forgotten that the Salvation Army is quite selective in what it accepts, tags, and sells. Items are not lying around sloppily in huge bins, but rather are all meticulously sorted, and only things that are in good condition are offered. Perhaps more heavily-worn items are donated to shelters and other charitable organizations, but the retail shops are attempting to make money (to donate 52

to charitable causes), and tattered junk just doesn’t sell. After much hunting, I came upon a pair of heavily-pilled red sweat pants with “St. Georges” printed down the left leg. They had a drawstring waist, and I planned to cut off the bottoms, so it seemed they’d fit well enough. Finding a top was more of a challenge. I finally unearthed a peach, short-sleeved, midriff-grazing, mock turtleneck made of thin, pilled knit fabric and layered it over one of my own old, stretched-out, white tanks. On the day of the photo shoot, I woke up and washed my face and brushed my teeth, but opted not to shower or brush my hair. My hair is naturally curly and voluntarily stands on end in a matted, frizzy mess when I rise, so it needed little- to-no help that day. I put on a brown, wool, newsboy cap for added affect and to slightly cover my face. I then ripped and cut a few holes in the sweatpants and shirts and slipped on two different socks and some rubber rain shoes. I needed to add some muck to the equation, but wasn’t particularly keen on scraping up dirt from the street and rubbing it on myself. Scanning my kitchen, I reached for the nutmeg – the closest equivalent to dirt I could find – and started smearing it all over. It stuck to my skin fairly well 17 with a bit of water and a dash of saliva, and it soiled my clothing as desired. I tore a small cardboard box in half and wrote “CAN’T GO HOME. HUNGRY. PLEASE HELP. GOD BLESS,” in cryptically crooked, barely legible letters, and reserved the second half of the cardboard for sitting on the street. Hailing a cab in front of my apartment was not difficult, but then again, perhaps this was more attributable to the fact that I quickly jumped in and didn’t give him the opportunity to assess my potential inability to pay the fare. He dropped me at the Starbucks on Astor Place, across from Kmart. Darren arrived shortly thereafter, and I asked him to find me a Starbucks cup inside, as I wanted to use it to collect money. While he was away, I planted myself on the ground to the right of the entrance. I sat on one piece of cardboard, with an “I ♥ NY” bag tucked under me, while holding the sign. It was in the upper 80’s and the sun shone directly overhead, beating down on my wool-capped head and overly-covered body. I could feel sweat dripping down my chest. I squinted and stared listlessly while keeping the sign prominently displayed as people passed. Two police officers emerged from the Subway stairs directly in front of me. My first instinct was fear – fear of being questioned about my state or harassed or, worse yet, of being arrested. I was fairly certain I wasn’t doing anything too terribly illegal, but it was noon on Sunday, so perhaps a homeless girl is as urgent as it gets at that time, even in NYC. They both glanced at me and clearly noted my existence, but without any verbal exchange on the matter, they walked on.

53

18 We journeyed down St. Mark’s to Avenue A, where I separated from Darren and walked to the benches just inside Tompkins Square Park. Although Tompkins Square has changed dramatically over the years, it still retains a sizable homeless and wino population, which gathers at the western most border of the park. Earlier in the summer, I had some time to kill and decided to sit in the park and relax while I waited. At that time, I was dressed more “averagely,” in shorts and a tank top. No fewer than five individuals, separately, each drunker than the last, approached me at that point, and when they approached, they came within an uncomfortable physical proximity – a closeness not welcome of most strangers, let alone drunk ones. The one female present was a large black woman in a curly blonde wig who stumbled between the various clusters of men. Just prior to my departure, she stripped out of all of her clothes and began parading around in her bra and underwear, which predictably provided uproarious entertainment for her male counterparts. Several of the individuals were still wearing white arm bracelets, presumably from some type of hospital or institution. On this day, however, I shuffled quietly over to the benches, my cardboard tucked under my left arm. There was a general group acknowledgement of my presence from the crew – a sideways glance, a brief pause in the conversation, a slight physical shift of attention in my direction, but no one approached, nor did they discuss me audibly. My believability not only to potential donors but to other down-and-out folks was of equal importance. The fact that I received so much attention earlier in the summer in that space, when I was clearly out of place, further substantiated my reception on this day. I was treated with marked difference on the two occasions, and should they have sensed that my shabby attire was somehow a façade, I am convinced they would have confronted or mocked me in some way. Darren took a few pictures from a safe distance, showing no signs of any affiliation with me, and appearing more like a 54

photographer who wanted to capture the harsh reality of New York City street life than someone contributing to a sociological experiment. There was a farmer’s market along the western perimeter of the park, outside the fence, so I migrated to the park entrance, just beyond the market, as there was significantly heavier traffic along that path, and I wanted to test my ability to receive donations. I settled into the area at the end of St. Mark’s, next to the “Tompkins Square Park” sign at the park’s entrance. We put in $0.71 at the outset of the day to signal to potential donors that other individuals had already deemed me a worthy cause, and within minutes at that post, I’d collected $1 in change from a post-hippy looking couple and a young college-aged girl.

19

This visual transformation forced me to examine how I responded to the pity my appearance induced in passersby, as well as the personally foreign receipt of money (however small the amount), in exchange for no goods or services on my part, but merely the appearance of need and visibly-deduced worthiness. While it is possible others may pity me in my everyday life, it is not a feeling that has ever been articulated to me, nor do I sense that people are compelled to pity me. Pity, unlike empathy, necessarily involves an imbalance of power that is not easily regained. Empathy may involve a situational point of understanding and humanitarian connection that need not position the empathized in a subordinate position to the empathizer. Pity, however, elicits a dynamic of separation and superiority, and leaves one in a most compromised position. The psychological impact of the internalization of this pity manifests itself physically. It was as if I began the day outwardly self-assured, almost oblivious to my tattered appearance, still carrying myself with my usual confidence. But with each stolen glance and sympathetic double- take, I could feel my energy retract and draw further inward. My shoulders slumped and my head rested slightly to the left or the right, but never completely upright. My eyes remained distant and frequently downcast; my hands tucked under the edge of my shirt in a loose fist. The 55

hands are a body part frequently associated with power and status. There’s the classic emphasis on “a strong handshake” and the conclusions that are drawn from the level of grooming and upkeep one applies to his or her hands (i.e. fastidiously manicured, soft, pampered hands vs. rough, workers’ hands), but it’s how one positions the hands in relationship to the immediate context that is perhaps most symbolically charged, especially when they are made to be invisible. Whether tucked into pockets or under the arms or beneath one’s clothes, as I did, the action demonstrates an inability to assert power on one’s own behalf. If the hands are invisible or tucked away, they are not available to defend or support the person in physical conflict or even in non-verbal articulation for added emphasis. To hide the hands is to silence – and submit to the powerlessness of pity. I caught a cab home and showered, washing off the fake dirt and the feelings of helpless inferiority alike. The clothes are now thrown away, and I certainly wouldn’t claim that I understand what it’s like to be homeless, but what has stuck with me is the unanticipated ease with which I was able to transition internally from strong and confident to wallowing and needy. Several people around my age walked past me while I sat at the entrance of the park. They were white guys and girls with dreadlocks, backpacks, and a few dogs, advertising on their cardboard signs that they were in need of money to leave town. As they traveled to their desired begging spot, they glanced sideways as if to say, “Hello, you’re like me.” Their degree of “need” was questionable to me, especially in comparison to some of the other more visibly distressed individuals I encountered. I don’t know how the donors determined who was deserving of their pocket change – the drunk park gang, the matted-haired backpackers, or the nutmeg-smeared sullen girl – but in the days since, I have walked past several people on the street, shaking a paper cup with change in it, who seem more complacent than devastatingly forlorn. And yet, I still pity them.

Physiognomy – the belief that one’s character can be derived from her outward appearance – is still alive and well on the city streets. Politically speaking, it is at the core of how we decide to ally ourselves and the individuals in whom we invest our trust:

What…does integrity, that quality of unimpeachable conviction we insist we are looking for in those who represent the common interest, look like? How readily can it be faked? And does it matter either way, especially in the political realm where simulation is all, where authenticity often resides in the details rather than the message? (Merkin 2007)

Authenticity is frequently visibly perceived, rather than audibly communicated. My level of neediness was intuited based exclusively on a glance, not my bank account balance.

And while that was an extreme situation, there are many contexts in which one’s visual appearance can overshadow the reality of one’s circumstances, abilities, or character. 56

Richard Sennett asks if what the observers see on the street is illusory or real (Sennett

1976, p.66), but as demonstrated in my experiment as a homeless person, the

significance of the question lies not in the reality of the appearance, but rather in what

determines how it is perceived. While discussing this topic, Lynn Yaeger revealed

that all the jewelry she wears is always real – except for the earrings she wears

everyday. “Everyone thinks the earrings are real, they think they’re these big

diamond earrings, but they’re not. I bought them in Washington Heights 20 years

ago” (Lynn Yaeger 31 ). Yaeger feels it’s easier to pass the earrings off as “real”

because they’re far away from the viewer. It would take an up-close, studied

examination of the diamonds to expose them as fakes, and the city streets don’t afford

that type of intimacy. Similarly, photographer Ari Versluis described a fashion trend

in his home city of Rotterdam, in which immigrant teenagers (over 50% of

Rotterdam’s population are immigrants) wear heels and fake glasses in an attempt to

appear to be older executive women. “You ask, ‘Are those your real glasses?’ and

[they respond], ‘Oh no, they’re fake, of course. I don’t need glasses, but it looks so

intellectual’ ” (Ari Versluis 32 ). The girls are simultaneously “trying on” various

modes of distinction, giving the illusion of belonging to a particular group, and

wiping away any feelings of invisibility they may have felt without their adapted

accessories.

31 Lynn Yaeger, interview by author, New York, NY, May 10, 2007. 32 Ari Versluis, interview by author, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, April 2, 2007.

57

Learning this language is key to one’s ability to convincingly demonstrate belonging.

One socialite I interviewed, Layla 33 expressed her desire to belong:

Maybe [it is] because we are all so alone in many ways that we want to be part of something. We want to be part of a group, a society, to have some identity. We are Jewish, we are Armani, we are…Park Avenue, members of a club. And we put ourselves in boxes. A box in a box in a box in a box…It makes us find some sort of comfort. Happiness? I don’t know what it is. But we belong to something. (Layla 34 )

Layla’s longing to belong to a group, demonstrates one face of what Gilles Lipovetsky refers to as a type of “aesthetic individualism,” in which the individual must conform to the visual rules of the society, and yet is still expected to express his own tastes. “One must look like other people, but not exactly” (Lipovetsky 1994, 33). He uses the terms

“mimesis” and “individualism” to describe the components of the process in which the hierarchical powers set the precedent for which the mimetic acts of the masses eventually follow. Lipovetsky argues that mimesis and individualism are not at odds within fashion, but rather that they are actually complementary. This mimetic individualism negotiates the tension between group belonging and personal expression, thereby allowing the individual to assert and gain power as result of her visible engagement with the group.

Harold Koda, the curator of the Costume Institute at the Metropolitan Museum of

Art, relayed a story about an encounter in Japan, where one person’s everyday

presentation of self illustrated the technique of mimetic individualism:

The Japanese have this word for a certain style peculiar to people in Tokyo: “iki.” We were taken to a yakitori restaurant and there were three chefs, including the owner, and they were all dressed identically, and my friend, a graphic designer, said, “Well, that guy (the owner) is iki.” The guy was attractive, but they were all relatively attractive. Still, the owner was the

33 Name and key identifying details changed by request of interviewee, with mutual agreement.

34 Layla, interview by author, July 9, 2007. 58

most attractive, so I asked, “Is it because he’s attractive?” And my friend said, “No, look at the way he has his headband.” I looked at all the guys: What the Japanese do when they’re in these work situations, rather than a hairnet, they will take a piece of cloth, like a tea towel, and fold it over several times. The cloth is turned into a kind of bandana and they wrap it around their head. What the owner had done was twist his, probably with water, so it was really tight, more a cord than a band. All the others wore their headbands straight across their foreheads, but his was skewed at a rakish angle. So, it was in two small details where, in a quotidian and functional gesture, that he established his authority. Iki, an aesthetic virtuosity, transformed utility into artistic expression and his primacy among his workers. His affectation was discernable, but resided really in the virtually inconsequential details. Individual expression is so often in the details. (Harold Koda 35 )

Koda’s last remark is evocative of Erving Goffman’s claim that “our sense of personal identity often resides in the cracks” (Goffman 1960, 320). The overall look demonstrates belonging and group affiliation, while the nuances of appearance negotiate one’s power within the group – a type of individualized mimesis.

It was nearly impossible to discern my inner character or my actual group affiliations in both field experiments described in this chapter. The urban audience believed what was presented to them visually, as the anonymity of the street rarely asks for further credentials beyond appearance. This appearance is mediated not only by the strategic use of color or by the studied manipulation of one’s street persona, but also by new media that further complicates how one sees and is seen. Within this emerging landscape of technologically mediated appearances, certain individuals, must maintain a heightened level of awareness of their visual perception, as explored in the following section.

35 Harold Koda, interview by author, New York, NY, February 1, 2007. 59

Rethinking Reality: Media and Celebrity in Everyday Life 20

36

We are licensed to form strong views on the clothes of public figures, whose ensembles we can scrutinize in detail. (Hollander 1994, 198)

John Berger argues that the scope of our vision perpetually transforms itself, as

“our vision is continually active” (Berger 1977, 9), and we constantly take in multiple

objects in a single glance. Art, photography, and film alter the scope of this vision, as

they impose limits on one’s viewing, making what was once visible invisible and

accentuating otherwise overlooked details. Through art and the mediums of media, the

individual is confined to the desired perspective of the artist or editor, privy only to what

36 Photo from field experiment, “Preppy,” conducted July 14, 2007, which is not included in this dissertation. 60

their eyes would have the viewer see – and therefore know. “Perspective makes the single eye the center of the visible world” (Berger 1977, 16). Their eye becomes our eye.

Technology and media facilitate the personal performance consciousness that

Hollander asserts is necessary to look “right” and, ultimately, feel physically at ease and

mentally safe:

Repeated pictures keep images present in the eye, desirable, ready for associative significance, and prone to instant imitation followed by swift modification, subversion, replacement and eventual rediscovery…This is a currency not just of images but of the mode of making them – “realistic,” fictional, bound to a dramatic human narrative that is never finished, a modern serial tale. We use the mirror to check our place in it. (Hollander 1994, 27)

These new technological mediums allow us to watch and rewatch our bodies in motion, scrutinizing and fine-tuning our performance of self. The habituation and repetition of this performance of self is the foundation of everyday life. Bourdieu refers to one’s ritualized state of being as a “habitus,” or “a system of dispositions” (Bourdieu 1977,

214). 37 The habitus operates at the subconscious level, where the meaning of the context- specific practices is perceived (Bourdieu 1984, 101, 466). We now operate in a state of existence in which the habitus is mediated by groups of interrelated images and further complicated by new media like the Internet. The social state that arises from these new forms of mediated interaction may be examined through a Goffmanian lens, as email, blogs, personal ads, social networking profiles, and other online mediums of communication offer a type of “impression management on steroids” (Rosenbloom

2008). Text and strategically-focused images combine to create a new form of self-

37 He qualifies “dispositions” as “the result of an organizing action…a way of being, a habitual state (especially of the body)…, a predisposition, tendency, propensity, or inclination” (Bourdieu 1977, 214). 61

presentation in which the manner and appearance of the exchanged information is as important as the content itself. This cyber-communication demands that users present themselves to multiple audiences simultaneously, and individuals may choose to present only the “best” or ideal aspects of their personality, generally without social consequences. Mediated self-presentation cumulatively affects the rules of interaction, introducing a multitude of new outlets and methods for social performance, all of which reshape the very nature of what it means to effectively and meaningfully communicate.

Jeffrey Goldfarb, in The Politics of Small Things (2006), addresses this modern issue of technologically-mediated interaction. For him, media like the Internet offer an opportunity to move from virtual interaction – which may seem to offer merely a spectator-based, disparate dialogue – into “embodied interaction” that produces

“concerted action” (Goldfarb 2006, 73). To what extent is the body’s appearance still relevant to communication and public action in light of these technological alternatives to face-to-face interaction? The proliferation of new media for communication have not lessened the impact of visual self-presentation and physical presence, but rather, have expanded the modes of expression available to the individual, all of which contribute to a more nuanced articulation of self and complex construction of identity. Arjun Appadurai comments on this new, intricate state of self-expression and communication:

Many lives are now inextricably linked with representations, and thus we need to incorporate the complexities of expressive representation (film, novels, travel accounts) into our ethnographies, not only as technical adjuncts but as primary material with which to construct and interrogate our own representations. (Appadurai 1996, 64)

62

“Embodied interaction” and “concerted action” is thus a product of these complex representations of self. Media mixes with the realities of our lives, and the image and the person become inseparable. Self-publishing, as offered by such popular sites as

Facebook and MySpace, allow the user to engage in a type of self-design, whereby

“electronic media provide resources for self-imagining as an everyday social project”

(Appadurai 1996, 4). One’s possible self thus becomes indistinguishable from one’s

“real” identiy.

There is an immediacy to fashion and its influences in a technology age, as information and products are leaked prematurely, and non-industry “critics” are able to blog on the trends and transmit their voices to mass audiences at little-to-no cost. Unlike more traditional media sources, fashion blogs are not as likely to pay homage to the fashion establishment, as they are not as reliant upon their funding for advertising. Thus, they have more freedom to focus on the less glitzy, yet equally potent, aspect of dress culture: the street. It’s not that the street has suddenly become more interesting or attention-worthy in recent years, but rather, that new media outlets like fashion blogs have different rules and different interests. The sites “offer an experience more like lounging on a park bench than flipping through a fashion magazine,” as they are not label-conscious, rarely mention price, and “strengthen the leveling and decentralizing forces that continue to dismantle the once dominant fashion pyramid” (Shubow 2006). 63

Lynn Yaeger is a fashion writer 38 and dress-obsessed eccentric whose style is a self-described “happy combination of a 1920's flapper (the bee-stung lips), a flea-market doll (the cheeks) and a prewar Parisian prostitute (the hair in those Brassai photographs)” who aims to look like “the world’s oldest French21 orphan, circa 1930” (Yaeger 2005).

She recounted her own unanticipated 15 minutes of “fame” to me, in which she was 21 featured on The Sartorialist ,39 the popular

New York-based street fashion blog (generally considered to be the street-fashion blog, averaging over 70,000 hits per day, according to The Guardian 40 ), written and photographed by Scott Schuman (who ignored my repeated attempts to contact him for an interview for this dissertation). Schuman photographs people on the street and invites visitors to the site to comment on his subjects’ style.

However, unlike other fashion blogs, he is more interested in chic sophistication than hipster trendiness. Yaeger described her

Sartorialist exposure:

38 A former columnist for the New Yorker , she currently writes a long-running, bi-weekly column for The Village Voice – recently renamed “Frock Star,” formerly “Elements of Style” – and is a regular contributor to T: The New York Times Style Magazine , Vogue , Travel & Leisure , and The Atlantic Monthly .

39 Scott Schuman, “The Sartorialist,” http://thesartorialist.blogspot.com .

40 http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/mar/09/blogs

64

They put my picture up and there were like 80 people [who commented]. It was an unbelievable experience at being ripped apart in public. Some people were very nice and supportive, but other people were really vicious. It was really frightening. They had just stopped me [as] I [went] into the subway and they said, “Can we get your picture?” and I said “Sure.” I just didn’t realize that this conversation…I mean, I thought it was great, except when it was mean, it was a little scary. (Lynn Yaeger 41 )42

Yaeger’s experience encapsulates the simultaneous seductive allure and daunting downfalls of appearing in these new media for visual self-presentation: One is at once flattered by the attention – the thought that one’s image is “worthy” of publication – and yet, perhaps after-the-fact, struck with the reality that with the glamour comes new opportunities for scrutiny. As Hollander states, “We live in a world of visible projections, and we are all visible projections in it. Like it or not, we all have looks, and we are responsible for them” (Hollander 1994, 198). Blog and Internet scrutiny is of the most dangerously vicious variety, as it permits amateur critics to leave anonymous and frequently biting remarks that need not hold fact-based viability, nor do they hold the commentators liable in any significant way.

Goffman divides the spheres of appearance into the front stage, which is intended for public viewing, and the back stage, which is a type of preparatory realm, a state that wishes to remain invisible socially, in which one is not in the game or prepped for an audience. As American social life grows more casual in appearance, the rules of these two realms continue to redefine themselves in the urban cityscape. Madelyn Ewing, a

41 Lynn Yaeger, interview by author, New York, NY, May 10, 2007.

42 See http://thesartorialist.blogspot.com/search?q=lynn+yaeger for Yaeger’s photo (also pictured above) and the accompanying comments from visitors to the blog.

65

free-spirited, financially independent, Upper East Side woman, and Frauke, 43 a German

socialite and former Wall Street executive, commented on the “casualization” of society:

Everybody looks like they’re going to the beach. I just noticed it today. Much more freedom…I didn’t see a single person in an outfit that would have been acceptable to my mother. Nothing at all. I remember when I first bought on Park Avenue, I was high up…in the 90s. Nobody really lived up there but me…it was outside of the confident area. And I remember thinking to myself, “Well I’m so glad I don’t have to get dressed up for the doorman.” Because women in the 60s and 70s and even the 80s [blocks], they had to put on the right clothes to go out of their houses. Because the doorman would say, “Ooh, did you see Mrs. So-and-So? She didn’t have on her earrings and her hat today.” It was a terribly restrictive society. I think things have changed dramatically in society, and I’m all for it, frankly. [Although,] I think it would be nice to look at a prettier picture. (Madelyn Ewing 44 )

I think things are getting more casual, which I think is terrible. When you’re at the airport, some of these people look like they just rolled out of bed, barely washing their hair or taking a shower, and I don’t quite understand it. Don’t they ever look in the mirror and see how badly they look? People shouldn’t look like an unmade bed. And my feeling is if you’re looking sloppy, you’re a sloppy person. Again, it has nothing to do with money, but with neatness. [Would you run out to the corner store—?] Looking like a mess? No. Again, I don’t do it at home either. To me, it’s more a matter of self-respect. I don’t want to look like that, I don’t want to look at myself looking like that. So, need it or not, I will wash my hair, take a shower and brush my teeth and wash my face and put on make-up everyday. (Frauke 45 )

With the social permission to “look like you’re going to the beach,” the public and private divide diminishes, as once was relegated to the back stage has now seeped into the front stage, where traditionally “domestic” attire is now designed specifically as daily street wear and, as Frauke’s commentary highlights, many grooming rituals are regarded as optional.

However, not all individuals have the privilege of enjoying the public embrace of casual appearance. Allison Aston, a native New Yorker and the public relations director

43 Name and key identifying details changed by request of interviewee, with mutual agreement.

44 Madelyn Ewing, interview by author, New York, NY, June 18, 2007.

45 Frauke, interview by author, July 19, 2007. 66

at David Yurman, the celebrity-embraced jewelry company, is always in the public eye, and her appearance is paramount 46 : “Professionally, I think that in my kind of job, you

have to have a certain look, because you are visible. I think that there is an expectation

that you look good, that you dress well, that you accessorize well, that you have makeup

on, that you don’t come in looking disheveled” (Allison Aston 47 ). This is not dissimilar

to actress Hilary Swank’s comment in The New York Times : “I think your image is part of

your career because the career itself is commerce” (Trebay 2006). When you work in the

image industry, your image is your currency.

Sometimes, however, even image industry professionals slip up on their image management. Carmen Electra, the sometimes-singer and consummate sexpot, believes

“everybody has to have a stylist deciding everything and a manger who wants you to have a stylist doing that,” but “at some point, you’re going to dress yourself to go to the grocery store. And that’s when you get caught” (Trebay 2006). Many websites prey on these types of slip-ups where the celebrity is “caught” in their backstage mode, not looking ready for their close-up (see photos distributed across the Internet of celebrities shockingly captured without their makeup, next page). By daring to enter the social realm without a consistently flawless, surreal image, they both excite and disappoint their fans – “Oh, they’re real!” seems to be exclaimed from adoring admirers who also love to hate them: “How unglamorous! Maybe they’re not worthy of such idol-worship.”

46 As an aside, Aston was 9 months pregnant and expecting in 4 days on the afternoon of our interview.

47 Allison Aston, interview by author, New York, NY, April 11, 2007. 67

22 23

24

(Clockwise from left: Christina Ricci, Jennifer Lopez, Demi Moore)

But, as demonstrated earlier in this chapter, in a technological age, we all operate within the image industry – our image is more ubiquitous and potent than ever before, to relative, differing degrees, and thus it consequently trades at a higher personal price in the social exchange marketplace.

Sherry Maysonave’s list of image consulting services extends not only to the professional woman, but also the professional socializer. In addition to wardrobe analysis and professional appearance techniques, she coaches on topics such as maximizing personal attractiveness, appearing slimmer, dining etiquette, and entering and exiting vehicles gracefully:

The end goal there is what are their goals and what do they want? Are they looking for a special mate? Social advancement? In the Junior League realm it’s not social advancement – it’s more just looking gorgeous. They do a lot of volunteer work and sometimes they don’t know how to go into those agencies without flaunting their wealth – still being accessible, looking professional – not too too social or too too wealthy. (Sherry Maysonave 48 )

48 Sherry Maysonave, interview by author, New York, NY, September 16, 2006. 68

This can be even more complicated for women, as John Berger argues that a man’s

physical presence communicates the amount and type of power he embodies and what he

is capable of doing and achieving, whereas a woman’s presence communicates her

attitude of herself and what can or cannot be done to her. Every physical element – a

woman’s clothes, expressions, environment, etc. – are understood to represent her very

being. As an object historically under the surveillance of another (i.e. the male, who acts

as her keeper), the female retains a self-consciousness in which she is perpetually aware

of the vision of herself. This is of supreme importance for the success of woman:

Men survey women before treating them. Consequently how a woman appears to a man can determine how she will be treated…Men act and women appear. Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at…The surveyor of woman in herself is male: the surveyed female. Thus she turns herself into an object – and most particularly an object of vision: a sight. (Berger 1977, 46-47)

Berger’s argument that women appear and men act was reinforced by stories recounted by several of the women with whom I spoke:

I’ve had men come along, rich men in my life who would say, “Well, here’s my credit card, sweetie,” because they think that’s what women want, and they want you to go out and spend it on clothes. That’s what makes women happy…They think women are only concerned about buying clothes…It’s about a control factor. And also, there’s a lot about the more jewels you have, the richer you are. It’s historical...They want to have their mates dolled up with the most tattoos, even in the most primitive societies. They have the bigger holes in their noses and ears or the bigger bones. I think it’s very much what our species seems to be into. The more powerful the male, the more he wants his woman to look good. It’s an adjunct to his power. His queen has to have diamonds in her crown or around her neck. And I think that that has been changing. A lot of women are saying, “Look, we can afford what we want, we’re just not going there.” It takes a lot of time to look pretty. To have your toes done, and your nails done…I don’t have the time for it, and I didn’t have the money for it for a long time. Now I can and I don’t. (Madelyn Ewing49 )

49 Madelyn Ewing, interview by author, New York, NY, June 18, 2007.

69

In the old age, women would never be able to afford jewelry. It was always men who bought them jewelry. So a woman wearing an expensive piece of jewelry was saying, “Some very successful man has claimed me.” Well, that’s not the case anymore. Women buy very expensive jewelry for themselves. So, that’s really in flux. And, occasionally, it signals, “I’m being adored by a successful man.” But, these days, that’s changing. There can be certain circumstances… where there are men of a certain generation and “trophy wives”…one hates to be stereotypical, but they seem to be very obviously trophy wives. Enhanced in every conceivable way. And they’re very flashy, richly dressed. Not like the older wives, who may be dressed just as expensively, but not as flashily. So, there’s a set of visual signals to say, “If I’ve got a trophy wife, I want to show her off.” You can spot the trophy wives from across the room. So they do tend to dress like a flock of birds. (Betty Sue Flowers 50 )51

Flowers’ and Ewing’s accounts demonstrate the extent to which women are claiming their own financial independence, and subsequently, transforming visual norms. Many women have their own separate credit cards and bank accounts. This financial segregation is an exercise in independence that extends to how and for whom they are dressed, and it changes the social rules around the image they construct. They are reclaiming their own appearance by, quite literally, owning it. Other women who do not have such financial independence or who simply don’t want to suffer the scrutiny of their husbands and partners, find ways of secretly maintaining a certain image through covert tactics like paying in cash for their material indulgences.

Despite these changes in women’s financial independence which facilitate a relinquishment of merely “appearing,” the socialite circuit has experienced renewed glamour in recent years, as perpetually new ways of documenting one’s social

50 Betty Sue Flowers, phone interview by author, May 18, 2007.

51 Dr. Betty Sue Flowers is the director of the Lyndon Baines Johnson Library and Museum, prior to which she served as the Kelleher Professor of English and the Director of Creative Writing at the University of Texas at Austin. She has authored and edited numerous publications and collaborated on four television tie-in books with Bill Moyers, the most notable of which is Joseph Campbell’s The Power of Myth .

70

appearances via new media and popular celebrity tabloids has gained widespread popularity. This, however, was not always the case, as Brooke 52 recounts:

When I was younger, to be in the press, to flaunt what I had was looked upon as really classless and not what you would want to do at all. But I feel like now, with the mainstream, it’s becoming more and more acceptable. So we’re entering into and looking at the social arena as a career. Instead of the other way around, where they have a career and they go out and find that participating in [social events] is helping their career. It’s like they’re doing this social thing in reverse. And then they get offers, because they’re in the public eye, they get offers afterwards. It’s an interesting turnaround… My dad used to say, “The only time you’re in the public press is when you’re born, when you’re married, and when you die.” You never wanted to be in the press. (Brooke 53 )

Times have changed, however, and one’s frequency of appearance within the press has become highly desirable by upper class social circles. Brooke grew up in the New York private girls’ school society and is now the director of public relations and a partner at a very successful NY-based jeans company, Trendy Jeans. Trendy Jeans is a downtown, hipster-oriented brand, while her social life is based in Upper East Side society, and charity functions frequently serve as a link between these two worlds for high-society, image industry professional women. They are also the focal point for the public eye, which has a growing obsession with everyday celebrities or socialites.

Many of these women belong to and even serve on boards for multiple prominent charity organizations. Brooke speaks to how she perceives of her role at these charity events:

[Charities are] very tied into my work. It is that kind of social girl scene, where you go out in New York with the celebrities of New York and maintain those contacts and the editor contacts. It’s all the same. It’s really the fashion crowd that is going to the events. You’re

52 Name and key identifying details changed by request of interviewee, with mutual agreement.

53 Brooke, interview by author, April 9, 2007.

71

supporting the charity, but you’re also working… Typically a fashion house is responsible for [the] event. For example, this year I think it was Escada that was sponsoring the Botanical Gardens event. So, typically all the chairs and vice chairs wear the designer. They go out to the event and get photographed and get put in magazines and the design house gets credited. That’s how it ties back into each other. A lot of the time, what you choose to wear is not what you [would normally] choose to wear. (Brooke 54 )

Brooke’s appearance at these events is scrutinized not only by other attendees, but by an increasingly interested and informed public. The charity circuit has been referred to as “a kind of reality show” that serves as “an extended publicity campaign for young women who seek to become famous. They compete in a gossip free-for-all played out in tabloids and on the Internet. In this mediated world, public image cuts dangerously close to private reality, and it is considered an honor to have one’s photograph rudely dissected on a Website” (Wilner 2007). While I have the utmost respect for all of the women I interviewed for this project and do not believe they participate in the “extended publicity campaign” Wilner describes, they are still, unfortunately, subject to this vindictive public scrutiny.

Wendy Lewis, a.k.a. “The Knife Coach,” is a cosmetic surgery consultant who is regularly approached by tabloids and gossip columnists with requests to dissect the appearance of socialites and celebrities:

I can’t stand celebrity magazines. They’ll send me a photograph of somebody I don’t know, and they’ll say, “What do you think she’s had done?” I mean, to me they look interchangeable. As far as I’m concerned, it’s switched at birth. Who is this? I don’t know who this is, nor do I care. I get this e-mail with this picture of a woman with a band-aid on her face, and the next day I see the tabloid and it says, “What do you think she’s covering up with that?” Has it ever occurred to them that maybe her cat scratched her? Do we really

54 Brooke, interview by author, April 9, 2007.

72

know that this is anything other than that? It’s getting ridiculous. But you know, there’s got to be an audience. Somebody’s reading it. (Wendy Lewis 55 )

More than a few people are reading it. In September of 2007, New York Magazine ran an

article entitled, “The Socialista Universe,” which featured who was in, out, and rising on

the New York social scene (several of whom were interviewed for or affiliated with

interviews taken for this project). The article included a symbolic system that indicated

each woman’s martial status, socializing patterns, occupation, pedigree, and domestic pet

affiliations beneath her picture. 56 The now-defunct website, socialiterank.com, was perhaps the most extreme case of this socialite-sighting obsession. It began in April of

2006, and for the year that followed, the site released a bi-weekly “Social Elite Power

Ranking” which scored the women of the Upper East Side social and charity ball circuit according to four categories: “personal styles and designer relations”; “press coverage in major publications and gossip columns”; “appearances and commitment to events”; and

“hot factor – what makes each of the individuals sizzle with personality” – all of which was calculated and documented via rankings and graphs for each socialite. The website was anything but coy about its intentions: “Next time you think about skipping that certain gala, wearing that unknown designer, dating some weird band member, beware.

We’re watching. And your ranking is on the line!” the site warned. The site was later outed in a New York Magazine article (Wilner 2007) as a joke staged by Valentine and

Olga Rei, two Russian stepsiblings. They maintain a placeholder for the website, but all

55 Wendy Lewis, phone interview by author, February 1, 2007.

56 See http://nymag.com/news/people/31541/ for the complete article and listings. 73

of the content has since been removed. However, during its year of existence, it gained thousands of loyal fans and contributors (including many socialites) who actively visited the site and left (frequently biting) comments on the party photographs. Socialites were even invited to submit personal information for their own profiles. The site developed the power to make or break a social figure during its year-long tenure. One prominent storyline followed the social rise of an undergraduate New School student, Olivia

Palermo, whose reputation was smeared by the website when they posted a letter Palermo allegedly wrote from a Yahoo account and sent to 70 other socialites in an attempt to dismiss herself as a threat to other reigning social queens. The website shut down one month later, with the founders citing plans to publish a book, The Year of the Rank .57

Brooke commented on what she saw happening to these socially ambitious girls:

A lot of these girls think that they want to be in the public eye in that way, so they work really hard to get there. And then they get there and they’re miserable because a) it’s not really fulfilling, and b) people are trying to tear you down all the time. It’s terrible. I see these young girls and all of a sudden, everybody hates them. It’s like high school and I just feel like it can’t be easy. And it’s mostly because people are bored and they’re trying to create drama. (Brooke 58 )

The young girls Brooke describes trade their photographed images for what they perceive will be enhanced social capital. Socialiterank.com ranked women according to their public appearances – the number of times they appeared, the people with whom they

25 57 Park Avenue Peerage (http://parkavepeerage.com/ ) went on to acquire many of the viewers and contributors from socialiterank.com. This website, however, is run James Kurisunkal (pictured right), the son of Indian immigrants. He is an undergraduate student at the University of Illionois who runs the site out of his dorm room and had never been to a single society event until he, too, was outed by New York Magazine in 2007.

58 Brooke, interview by author, April 9, 2007. 74

were seen, and the number of photographs of them that circulated after the events – all of which reinforced the successfulness of their appearance based on its social value and worthiness of circulation – and, consequently, the individual’s social power.

Kurt Andersen refers to this celebrity idolization as a “Celebrity World,” where

“the jonesing for any speck of celebrity pixie dust can have a crack-whore quality”

(Andersen 2006, 20). The current social acceptance of celebrity-obsessed publications is a sharp turn from the reputation they had as recently as the 1970’s, when they were sparse and contemptible, a type of “media ghetto – or, rather, media trailer park”

(Andersen 2006, 20). Andersen believes this is a “postmodern democracy” at play, as viewers and readers are given instructions for a sort of celebrity mimesis. Brooke described the growing exchange she’s experienced, fueled by the media, between celebrities, socialites, and “real” people:

The media in LA is just so much more aggressive now. When I started working in magazines, there were no weekly magazines [except] The Enquirer , and nobody read it…Now the job is to read all the celebrity magazines and send stylists whatever [jeans] celebrities are wearing. When we first started [Trendy Jeans], we had a jean that was in InTouch and it was “Hollywood’s New it Jean.” There was this picture of Natalie Portman and Mandy Moore and Sienna Miller wearing the same jeans. We had over 1,000 orders that day for that particular style, whereas if your jeans are in Vogue, it’s more an image of the brand, but it’s not necessarily driving sales like that is…In New York, we don’t really have those kinds of high-profile celebrities as much as we do in LA. So it becomes this sort of socialite thing, and I think the media feeds it. Then, in turn, the PR of these design houses needs the socialite support. And the socialites like it because they’re getting their own publicity. It all just feeds off each other. (Brooke 59 )

This image-based feeding frenzy fuels confusion over the “reel” life versus the “real” life, to borrow Sherry Maysonave’s phrase. Chapter 6, “Commodified Flesh,” builds on this

59 Brooke, interview by author, April 9, 2007.

75

topic, as it looks at how we not only attempt to mimic the attire of media darlings, but also strive to assimilate into these image ideals by literally transforming our own flesh.

Our appearance is endlessly mediated, with variables like the use of color and new innovations in interactive media playing a continually evolving, significant role in the politics of visual self-presentation. As demonstrated on the urban street, one’s “street cred” is derived from seeing and being seen, which is neither absolute nor definite, but rather, is constantly understood in relationship with and as a complement to these active mediators. New media creates more outlets for appearance and has the power to artificially preserve one’s appearance, thereby blurring one’s front and backstage lives.

As a result, one’s “real” and imagined personas also become entangled and indistinguishable, further fueling the cult of celebrity and making the individual more exposed and vulnerable to public scrutiny.

Whether cloaked in bright plumage, sporting a fanny-pack, or smeared across celebrity tabloids, one’s appearance is mediated by visual signs and social indicators, all of which operate in an image-centric society that shamelessly rewards and penalizes on sight. As a tourist, my group affiliations were radically realigned. I interacted with and was noticed by individuals I encounter on a daily basis, but whose attention normally bypasses me, as I fail to signal relevance to their position without my tourist gear.

Dressed as a homeless person, my claim to power was drastically diminished – I could not make the fashion system work for me. It was fashion that was restricting my social potency, not authentic poverty. The assignation of group belonging and the possibilities of fashion, specifically its ability to impart or impair power, as facilitated not by “real” 76

circumstances but by my own sartorial imagination, is central to the findings of these experiments. As we are all characters in the larger social drama, the way in which we fashion our bodies and play our individual roles not only invests or strips power from the individual, but also transforms and reappropriates power on a larger scale as it affects social order.

There are social contexts which will be explored in the following chapter in which one is not merely an anonymous, nutmeg-stained face or a passing, peppy sightseer on the urban street, where one’s everyday facility with visual self-presentation is crucial to negotiate and sustain a claim to power in a professional arena. 77

CHAPTER 4

OUTFITTING SUCCESS: SEX, DRESS, AND PROFESSIONALISM

26

(Victoria’s Secret “Travel Suit Collection” advertisement, August 2007)

Perhaps men don’t care as much about the uniform they have to wear, because they consider business like a game, and like all sports, have a particular uniform to maximize performance and minimize injury…Women aren’t really taught that – that it’s about winning the game – not yet. You have your individual expression in many ways [as a woman] but if you’re going to play a game, you can’t play basketball in high heels and chandelier earrings. (Sherry Maysonave 60 )

It’s very hard to breastfeed in a business suit. (Betty Sue Flowers 61 )

Even in contexts in which one’s mind and skill set is presumed to be the guiding force behind one’s ability to excel and claim power, appearance positions itself silently,

60 Sherry Maysonave, interview by author, New York, NY, September 16, 2006.

61 Betty Sue Flowers, phone interview by author, May 18, 2007. 78

yet prominently, greatly affecting one’s perceived professionalism. Starting from the perspective of Thorstein Veblen and building to more modern perspectives by theorists like Anne Hollander, this chapter explores the relationship between power and dress in the workplace in an effort to distill a visual formula for success – or determine if one exists. The image management industry, the role of the suit and gender-specific professional dress codes, and the relationship between sexuality and perceived professional competence are of primary concern as I pose the question: What does success look like?

In The Theory of the Leisure Class (1899), Thorstein Veblen 62 describes conspicuous consumption in the leisure class, in which fashion is understood as the primary indicator of one’s social class and economic position. “Our apparel is always in evidence and affords an indication of our pecuniary standing to all observers at the first glance” (Veblen 2001 (1899), 123). He characterizes conspicuous consumption in terms of quantity, quality, and form or the manner of consumption. From the 19 th century onward, there was a movement away from flamboyance and ornate detail in men’s apparel, and since that time modern men traditionally have not displayed conspicuous consumption with the same flair as women. 63 It is the woman that is the recipient of the

gaze and the object of visual focus for both men and women. (As Daphne Merkin

62 While some of Veblen’s arguments have dated since they were first published in 1899, many of his concepts and key ideas, particularly those around conspicuous consumption, are still relevant and worthy of examination. Hence, I use him as an individual who lends an important perspective in the historical lineage of this topic.

63 This has started to shift in recent years, with men’s fashions taking on a gradually more conspicuous nature, but it is still far from balanced. 79

reminds us, “the Female Gaze is every bit as harsh as – if not harsher than – the Male

Gaze” (Merkin 2007).) Traditionally, the wife must consume and display that consumption “properly,” in which the right types of goods are consumed in the right way, to prove the reputability of the household, as these markers of wealth are understood to be markers of supremacy. Through this dynamic, the woman is seen as a vicarious consumer; she is not a symbol of her own economic strength, but rather, that of her husband:

The high heel, the skirt, the impracticable bonnet, the corset, and the general disregard of the wearer’s comfort which is an obvious feature of all civilized women’s apparel, are so many items of evidence to the effect that in the modern civilized scheme of life the woman is still, in theory, the economic dependent of the man – that, perhaps in a highly idealized sense, she still is the man’s chattel. The homely reason for all this conspicuous leisure and attire on the part of women lies in the fact that they are servants to whom, in the differentiation of economic functions, have been delegated the office of putting in evidence their master’s ability to pay. (Veblen 2001 (1889), 133)

The domestic imperative Veblen describes is no longer the norm for many women,

particularly women living in U.S. urban settings like New York. Rather, women

continue to enter into and assert themselves in the professional realm – a space where one

historically finds the gradual, awkward introduction of a female presence into a

structurally and visually masculine environment. The professional arena is founded upon

a feminine void and the pure, unadulterated proliferation of masculinity. What happens

when women enter this sphere? How does the dynamic change, and how do objects of

consumption and visual self-presentation contribute to this economic and social power-

play? 80

High heels, skirts, dresses, long hair – these (arguably) work-inhibiting, conspicuous leisure objects of traditional feminine dress are still very much a part of a woman’s “uniform” today in many social spheres, including the work place. Why are these objects retained and perpetually revered, even by women themselves, and if the traditional objects are retained, does that necessarily indicate that the roles remain imbalanced? There have been periods of renunciation of the classical feminine look, but women continue to set the visual standard for other women, and that standard strays very little from the visual trends that flourished when Veblen observed them at the turn of the

19 th century. If women continue to adhere to these traditional symbols of conspicuous

leisure, are they hindering their ability to succeed in the work place? Do women actively

sabotage their own prospects for success by conforming to the visual customs of leisure

class femininity in the professional sphere – a place where symbols of masculinity

resonate as “powerful” and spiked heels convey “sexy” far before they even hint at some

modern notion of professionalism? The presence of women within offices and in the

larger business world affects the theatricality of the gaze and the space of personal

appearance, as the rules of self-presentation and the visual symbols of interpersonal

communication are complicated and challenged. What role does fashion play in this

negotiation for power and distinction? Is fashion friend or foe to the career business

woman?

There are people who attempt to take an “anti-fashion” stance to personal appearance. They believe they’re choosing not to engage with the system by shunning trends and avoiding shopping as much as possible. One perspective, offered by Anne 81

Hollander, is that this may be a result of the burden that social dress codes impose on the individual. “The psychological effort involved in making fashionable choices is indeed repellent to many” (Hollander 1994, 20). While I agree with Hollander and believe that some individuals do shy away from fashion because it overwhelms them, it is important to note that, as much as the anti-fashion set may protest, they are still participating in fashion: they still make a selection, and there are always items worn and others rejected.

Even so, many will still declare themselves “fashion neutral” – a categorization that begs for qualification. But what IS a neutral appearance? In my conversation with Professor

Mary Lynn Damhorst, 64 she commented on her own research around women and professional attire, stating that women tend to be “marked” by appearance, whereas men can more easily strive for neutrality (although, as I argue above, total neutrality is never possible).

In an effort to dispel existing myths around traditional objects of conspicuous leisure,

I turn to Anne Hollander, who challenges this notion of gender-specific “marking” and questions many of the conventional ideas around the absoluteness of contemporary gender markings, recalling that both men and women wore high heels in the 17 th century,

a time when men’s attire in general – complete with stylized wigs – kept “men’s clothes

thoroughly committed to a show of artifice” (Hollander 1994, p.64). She also contests

the idea that women’s clothing has exclusively confined and outraged throughout history,

64 Mry Lynn Damhorst is an associate professor of textiles and clothing at Iowa State University, whose research is focused on the social, psychological, and communications aspects of dress and the body, consumer behavior, and body image. She is currently researching women's appearance in business roles, media and family influences on self-image, and the consumer use of technology for shopping. 82

arguing that all women in the past were not “angry victims in their long skirts and tight stays,” nor did they feel “forced into helplessness because of them” (Hollander 1994,

138). I believe it is too simplistic to blame an unfavorable imbalance in professional power on female dress, and Hollander makes several important points in defense of this claim: Women continue to voluntarily adapt these modes of dress into their wardrobes and lifestyles and, as witnessed by historical figures like Elizabeth I and Catherine the

Great, have exercised great political control while dressed in very constricting garments.

For those women, there is no question that their own sense of authority, and even of political and intellectual agility, was enhanced and supported by those clothes…Such clothing certainly did not confine those queens to the sofa, nor their conversation to frivolities, nor did it perpetually encourage them to faint, nor to feel submissive and inactive. Nor, I would say, to feel uncomfortable. In fact, both the inward feeling and the outward aspect of persons in their situation, male or female, who preserve bodily decorum, mental energy and rhetorical skill, who maintain good temper and good manners along with the capacity to stand, sit and walk with majestic ease and to ride horseback and dance gracefully for hours, all while visibly transcending the constant challenge of such garments, are infused with the aura of power and triumph, not with the sense of submission to burdens. (Hollander 1994, 138-139)

83

27 28 (Above left, Painting of Queen Elizabeth 1, c.1592; above right, uniform dress of Catherine II (a.k.a. Catherine the Great), c.1763)

This viewpoint contradicts the idea that traditional objects of conspicuous leisure not only impair labor, but prohibit the wearer from seizing power. Thus, the clothing itself is not a professional death sentence, nor does the wearing of such clothing necessarily position the woman in a subordinate position. Therefore, it is perhaps more interesting and advantageous to consider the nuanced system of adornment and communication available to women for manipulation using these sartorial tools of visual self-presentation, as opposed to arguing whether success is an impossibility in a corset and heels. The body, the context, and the particular combination of garments transcend any absolute semiotic reading of the items themselves. These variables take on different significance in each 84

geographic and social situation, making it increasingly more difficult to effectively read and adapt visually, hence the emergence of a thriving “image management industry,” as will be explored shortly. However, the female adaptation of the indefatigable suit – a timelessly armored garment, historically reserved exclusively for men – perhaps most significantly serves as a modern weapon in women’s struggle for professional virility.

Suiting Up: Office Armor and the Fight for Visibility

The diversity of the U.S. is witnessed not only in its ethnic and religious variety, but also its sharply contrasting regional standards of dress. Even professional norms vary from casual to formal and from colorful-preppy (New England, the South) to all-black- chic (New York) to body-conscious (Los Angeles, Miami) across the country. I interviewed Susan Dresner, a veteran image consultant of almost 30 years and the founder of the Ways and Means Institute, a New York-based wardrobe consulting service. I revealed to Dresner that I was originally from the Midwest, but she was only available for a phone interview, so she could not see me:

You said you’re from the Midwest. I have a prejudice, not against them, but there is some sensibility of the dress. There really really is. I can tell it immediately. They might be in New York, but I can say, “Oh, did you come from Iowa?” I mean, everybody looks the same from the Midwest? Not at all! But there is a sensibility and very often I have to work against it. (Susan Dresner 65 )

Unfortunately, it is impossible to determine if Dresner would have pegged me as a

Midwesterner based on my appearance, but based on over ten years in New York without a single incident in which I was asked if I was from the Midwest, my hunch is that she

65 Susan Dresner, phone interview by author, January 15, 2007. 85

would not have suspected it. How did I transcend my native regionalism and come to assert myself with the power of someone who “belongs” in the city? In my case, an innate instinct and personal style overruled geographical roots and worked to assist in my assimilation into my desired environment (NYC). But what if someone does not have those instincts – or cannot translate them into their appearance? Can someone learn effective style? Can you buy taste? I asked Susan Dresner how she attempts to impart

“good taste” onto her clients:

I don’t know how you address [the issue of taste], quite honestly, if you want to know the truth. My mother had excellent taste. She had been a designer before I was born, and we always had fabric around the house…And I did shopping at a very early age…It would be a very interesting study to see if that makes a difference in image consulting. I’ve always been a maverick in my dress. And usually if somebody hires me, sooner or later they’re going to pick something that’s maverick – that isn’t typical of what they have worn in the past. And people tell me that. I don’t necessarily get people into clothes like that right away. Sometimes it might take ten years of working together, but after a while they start—I do a lot of editing…and I think they start picking that up. Some people never pick it up. Some people leave me after a while and I might see them ten years later. This just happened recently: the woman was wearing beige everything, and…I put color in her life and she had turned back to beige. There’s nothing I can do about that. I don’t know if that’s a comfort zone on their part…Whether people realize it or not, to some extent, people are buying taste…I do believe that [taste can be taught]. I think it has a lot to do with exposure. (Susan Dresner 66 )

Innate instincts and exposure, unfortunately, are not a possibility for everyone, which is where image consultants may step in. Grace Morton agreed with Susan Dresner’s take on one’s ability to learn to dress. In 1926, she wrote “Psychology of Dress,” which was published in the Journal of Home Economics , in which she anticipated the need for image

management consultants and personal stylists. Morton predicted this profession would

lift “clothing selection from the realm of the intangible based on intuition and personal

66 Susan Dresner, phone interview by author, January 15, 2007. 86

bias to the dignity of a tangible art with a scientific basis” (Morton 1926, 486). Her occupational vision has materialized, as the “image management” industry has developed into a multi-million dollar market in which aspiring individuals and Fortune 500 corporations alike invest with the hope of mastering the art of affective visual self- presentation.

In addition to Dresner, I also spoke with image consultant, Sherry Maysonave, the author of Casual Power and the founder and president of Empowerment Enterprises. . 67

She approaches taste-teaching with the same guarded optimism as Dresner:

Can I train someone else to have that eye and that knowledge?...It’s limited. And for me it’s really more about the nonverbal communication. I am not a fashionista. Fashion is very much a part of my business…but it’s not my primary passion; that’s not what I do with people. It’s more about [identifying] your goals. So it can be about an item of clothing, but it’s also the condition of it, the fit. I really believe in people looking authentic, even within a corporate dress code or a standard, to achieve your goals. (Sherry Maysonave 68 )

For Maysonave, it’s less about the trendiness of an item and more about the fusion of

personality and materiality in an effort to create a look that’s both comfortable for the

individual and believable to her audience. Both Maysonave and Dresner have a

personalized approach to image consulting that focuses on the individual needs of the

client rather than their ability to sell fashion (which frequently takes the emphasis

amongst the other dominant profession within the image consulting industry, the personal

shoppers). “I am personally and directly accountable for the clients. If I select things

67 Maysonave is regarded as an industry expert on nonverbal communication and corporate dress codes, and she and her trained representatives assist individuals and corporations as they attempt to understand and manipulate how they are viewed in the workplace. See www.casualpower.com for more on Empowerment Enterprises, Casual Power , and Sherry Maysonave.

68 Sherry Maysonave, interview by author, New York, NY, September 16, 2007. 87

that aren’t for them, that don’t represent their needs, they’re not my clients anymore, it’s very fast. I get feedback right away, and it’s very personal” (Susan Dresner 69 ). Like

Maysonave, Dresner presents a type of image consulting that transcends the garment.

For Dresner it’s almost a therapist/patient relationship, in which the compatibility of their personal chemistry and aesthetic vision is as integral to the process as the garments.

Neither women attempt to mold their clients into “successful women” using a precise visual formula, but rather they examine and play with the circumstantial elements and, through a collaborative effort with their clients, are able to make suggestions that build not only a mindful wardrobe but also a heightened sense of visual awareness that breeds confidence and can lay the foundation for positive social reception.

Just as regional pockets of the country present contrasts in image norms and style standards, so do specific industries. Dresner markets herself most aggressively to corporate women, using her own professional background as a point of intimate familiarity and first-hand knowledge:

There are absolutely cultures in every single large corporation. And it is part of my job to find out, either from the client themselves, or go down and sense the corporate culture…It’s not just banking. I need to know the difference between a Commerce Bank and a CitiBank, between a Morgan Stanley and a Goldman Sachs – big difference between those two companies, for instance….Women, because they have more choices in their clothes, [are] more vulnerable. That’s the only way I can put it. And also they’re still in the minority, so they’re going to stand out no matter what they wear. But the point is that they have to understand, know the corporate culture, and dress in accord with that. (Susan Dresner 70 )

What’s the root and lineage of these professional subcultures and their corresponding visual norms? Dr. Betty Sue Flowers, an expert on myth, links the modern business

69 Susan Dresner, phone interview by author, January 15, 2007.

70 Susan Dresner, phone interview by author, January 15, 2007. 88

woman with Diana or Artemis in classical mythology (as opposed to other figures like

Aphrodite or Demeter). Artemis and Diana demonstrated their independence by shunning traditional female dress, and Artemis avoided men and never married. She wore animal skins, which Flowers equates with a business suit and symbol of power in a male-dominated arena. “[The suit demonstrates the] independence of woman from the role of mother-nurturer. It’s very hard to breastfeed in a business suit. It’s very hard to have a business suit that is particularly sexy…But you could do a PowerPoint presentation in them” (Betty Sue Flowers 71 ). Men, according to Flowers, wear their suits

like great heroes in war uniforms: “Instead of armor and breast plates, they wear suits and

ties…You have [men] all dressed as an army” (Betty Sue Flowers 72 ). The business suit as a professional suit of armor is an appropriate metaphor for a garment that has withstood the test of time and continues to claim relevance and power.

The boardroom battlefield uniform of the suit, or the “standard masculine civil costume” (Hollander 1994, 3), began to take shape around 1666, and reached its current incarnation between 1780-1820, at which point the modern masculine image was fixed.

Hollander refers to the suit as an envelope for the body that is “universally flattering,” due to its loose-fitting de-emphasis of particular body details and curves (Hollander 1994,

9). The continued longevity of the suit demonstrates “how visual form can have its own authority, its own self-perpetuating symbolic and emotional force… tailored suits have proved themselves infinitely dynamic, possessed of their own fashionable energy”

71 Betty Sue Flowers, phone interview by author, May 18, 2007.

72 Betty Sue Flowers, phone interview by author, May 18, 2007. 89

(Hollander 1994, 4). Hollander depicts the suit as a potent visual form that is regarded as

29 more modern and aesthetically superior, and she believes women’s clothing did not become modern until it adapted elements of men’s fashion in the 20 th 29

century.

Costume historian Harold Koda cites the

entrance of the Chanel suit as a significant turning point

in women’s professional attire:

What the Chanel suit did was re-introduce gender in a way that’s both feminine and authoritative. Women were penetrating previously all-male spheres, and they took on the camouflage of the suit, to de-sex, to be male-like. To be accepted as equals, they had to fill a certain standard. And, sexuality couldn’t intrude on that professional world….You start to see, once enough women of authority were clearly established, the pushing of boundaries, of apparel that might be more than simply feminized analogies to male sartorial convention. Not the grey flannel suit anymore, but a suit with a difference, in fabric, cut, ornament. (Harold Koda 73 )

The Chanel suit demonstrated that wearing a suit no longer merely indicated the women were attempting to be men. It was not an attempt to “camouflage,” as Koda calls it, but rather an attempt to stand out and redefine the rules by defining their own visual presence.

Despite this progress, women continue to be minorities in many professional environments. Sylvia Moss, a native New Yorker, is Senior Managing Director at The

73 Harold Koda, interview by author, New York, NY, February 1, 2007. 90

Blackstone Group, 74 . She is one of only five female partners (out of 55 total partners). 75

We discussed the challenges and advantages of being a woman in her position:

I actually think it’s better for me in this position being a woman. I think that I have been able to develop relationships with people over the years, and those people are willing to talk with me if there are issues or problems that they see. And I’m not sure that one would be as successful in this position if one were a man, because I think that egos might get in the way – a reticence might be there that the guys – and there are mostly guys in this firm, even at a level below partner, there are few women – would perhaps not be as willing to have the kinds of discussions that they have with me. And I don’t know that – that’s totally anecdotal, but my sense is that’s probably the case. [Nevertheless,] I think it is difficult for women in an investment bank or a financial service firm. Being a woman is just difficult, because it’s a man’s world, and I think that you always have to deal with [that] fact. I think…it’s tougher for us to succeed…in business. I can give you a story that goes to the 80’s – you would think in the 80’s already that we’d moved ahead of the curve – [or were] starting to. A friend of mine had a very powerful position at a publishing house and worked for the president of the organization…he was retiring. And I said to her, “Why don’t you just get his job?” This was publishing, right? Everybody’s a woman in publishing, right? And she thought about it and said, “Every time I was up for a promotion I had to ask for it while my male colleagues who were at the same level got it automatically.” [She] went to start her own business and is very successful at it. But I don’t care, you name the company, and I’ll tell you it’s tougher being a woman in that company – not just Blackstone or any of our other competitors in the financial services area – that’s the world. How many woman presidents have we had? (Sylvia Moss 76 )

Obviously, the answer to Moss’s question is zero (at the date this was written). Women in politics are perhaps the most scrutinized female professionals in any industry. They live and die in the public eye and every word, action, and pantsuit they present is fodder for criticism. Their ability to carve out a space of appearance and claim the stage is crucial to their public viability. Daphne Merkin (2007) suggests that we analyze female politicians so obsessively because they are still a novelty, and because their diverse dress

74 The Blackstone Group is a private equity and asset management company that went public in 2007.

75 Sylvia is also a champion bridge player. She has won 7 North American Bridge Championships, and has been quoted as saying that “bridge makes her better at her job, and her job makes her a better bridge player” (http://usbf.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=158 ).

76 Sylvia Moss, interview by author, New York, NY, December 28, 2006. 91

patterns (in comparison to the males) offer an infinite number of outlets for scrutinization. Sherry Maysonave advises female politicians who face this challenge:

If [politicians are] from a very conservative area, they can’t have an extremely flamboyant look or [be] too Hollywood looking. They need a more conservative look…Who are their voters, who is their target? There has to be some [room] for personal expression to distinguish themselves from other candidates. Also, what looks good on them on television? But it has to do with their voters – and then the regular stuff: their body type, their coloring. [Most politicians] have someone who’s advising them – and some get bad advice. (Sherry Maysonave 77 )

Political efficacy – in any professional arena – is largely a question of audience believability, which is formed in part by conformity to the codes with which the audience is familiar. This harkens Goffman’s description of the public masking process, whereby the actor maintains her “personal front,” particularly through attention to her appearance.

One’s claim to power is then directly correlated to the success of that performance, and as

Maysonave stresses in her own image consulting, the ability to convey an air of authenticity is key – if the individual is not believable visually, her substance is considered equally suspicious. Creating images is authentic, but even authenticity isn’t

enough to secure power. The “maximization game” is a delicate balance for women, in

particular, as presenting themselves as “too” anything – too finished, too sexy, too

buttoned-up, too casual – can be the tipping point that ends in professional impotence.

Thus, many female politicians and professionals have presented themselves as “fashion

agnostic” (Alvarez 2007). A few have strayed from the norm successfully (i.e. Nancy

Pelosi, who has be been lauded for her use of color and accessories and designer suits),

but many have been chastised and sent back to the safe blandness of their former visual

77 Sherry Maysonave, interview by author, New York, NY, September 16, 2006. 92

agnosticism (i.e. Condoleezza Rice, who in 2005 was referred to as a dominatrix in her all-black ensemble of knee-high boots, above-the-knee skirt, and military style jacket, and Hillary Clinton, who seemed to take a daily beating by the media on her many style incarnations, but who has since sought refuge in the black pantsuit – both pictured on page 95 of this dissertation).

Hollander recalls the recurring theme in modern female dress of a bare, revealing top and a shrouded bottom, which she sees as reminiscent of the myth of women that corresponds with the image of a mermaid: “The upper half of a woman offers both keen pleasure and a sort of illusion of sweet safety; but it is a trap. Below, under the foam, the swirling waves of lovely skirt, her hidden body repels, its shapeliness armed in a scaly refusal, its oceanic interior stinking of uncleanness” (Hollander 1994, 61). Thus, it is no

surprise that women have turned to pants in an

effort to dispel this imagery.

Articulating female legs at last must have seemed…a necessary move in the theater of sexual politics. Demonstrating woman’s full humanity was essential…To show that women have ordinary working legs, just like men…was also to show that they have ordinary working muscles and tendons, as well as spleens and livers, lungs and stomachs, and, by extension, brains. (Hollander 1994, 62)

On January 18 th , 2007, The New York Times

reported that 6 out of 16 female senators entered

the Senate chamber in a black pantsuit on a

single day the previous week. Has the pantsuit

30 93

become the most potent incarnation of the man’s suit of arms for the modern professional woman – a visual reminder that women not only have legs, but brains, just like men? (If so, Hillary Clinton is doing so effectively, according to The New York Times , who said she “wears her clothes like armor” (Merkin 2007).) Does it necessarily offer more power than a skirt? Sylvia Moss contends that she hasn’t worn a skirt or dress or heels since she interviewed for her current job and doesn’t think that it is or should be an issue for her or anyone else who chooses to do the same. Margaret Walch, color specialist and consultant, however, disagrees, as she argues that women should celebrate their legs – not through the undefined covering of pants, but by showing the actual leg – and use them as a means of distinction from men, which she contends is actually more modern. Sherry

Maysonave says it’s difficult to reconcile both viewpoints, as professional women don’t want to look like men, but still want to be taken seriously. “It is a catch-22” (Sherry

Maysonave 78 ). The pantsuit may not be fashionable, forward, or flattering, but perhaps the more pressing question is, so what? Do female professionals want to be fashion- forward trendsetters who are accentuating their bodies? Perhaps some, like French politician Ségolène Royal, would, at the very least, like the right to do so. “Why should one have to be sad, ugly and boring to go into politics” (Graff 2006), she questioned in response to the public upheaval over photos taken of her in a bikini on the beach in 2006

(as pictured on the following page).

78 Sherry Maysonave, interview by author, New York, NY, September 16, 2006. 94

31 33

32

34

(Clockwise from top left: Ségolène Royal, Hillary Clinton, Condoleezza Rice, Nancy Pelosi) 95

But if they do choose to forego “sad, ugly, and boring,” what alternative messages are professional women sending? Samantha Marshall refers to this sartorial confusion that befalls professional women as a “fashion fog” (Marshall 2006, 51). It can be difficult for women to decipher when fishnets, exposed bra straps, low-riding pants, stilettos, and sheer, lacy fabrics are fashionable and when they’re a faux pas. Stepping into a business situation wearing something that might be considered inappropriate may indicate anything from arrogance to ignorance – neither of which are quickly promoted. Perhaps most frequently, women in overly feminine, sexy attire are assumed to be support staff instead of authority figures.

The relationship between perceived professionalism and dress is a topic taken up by Peter Glick, 79 a social psychologist and Professor of Psychology at Lawrence

University in Wisconsin, who conducted a study to test this hypothesis on the correlation

between women’s dress and the perceived level of her professional competence. In the

study, participants were shown either a video of a woman in an office wearing a sexy,

low-cut blouse, tight-fitting skirt, and heels, or a woman in a more conservative ensemble

of slacks, a turtleneck, and flats. The viewers were told that the woman was either an

79 Peter Glick and Susan T. Fiske received the 1995 Gordon Allport Intergroup Relations Prize for “The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating Hostile and Benevolent Sexism” (1996) which challenges conventional notions of prejudice by demonstrating that subjectively “positive” attitudes toward women are not benign, but promote inequality. This ambivalence is rooted in male dominance (patriarchy) and the interdependence between the sexes. Benevolent sexism offers a chivalrous ideology that seems to promote favorable attitudes toward women, when in fact it is rooted in gender stereotypes (i.e. the belief that men should pay for dates or that women are sweet and nurturing), while hostile sexism refers to the antipathy toward women who challenge male dominance, try to control men through feminist ideology or sexual seduction, or who embrace benevolent sexism while rejecting hostile sexism (i.e. having men pay for dates but demanding equal pay). Ambivalent sexism is measured using a questionnaire (the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory), in which participants agree or disagree with statements that measure benevolent and hostile sexism. 96

executive or a secretary and, in both instances, the woman delivered the same lines.

Viewers were asked to rate the woman’s competence, estimate her suspected GPA, and guess at the quality of the university she attended. The study concluded that sexy attire did not affect the level of perceived competence for the woman who was labeled as a secretary, but it drastically, negatively affected the perception of the executive.

The main thing there was that it did interact with status. So, if a woman was first described as a manager, then people found it very distasteful that she was dressed in a sexy way, whereas if she didn’t have this other form of status and it was a traditionally feminine occupation, like a receptionist, then it didn’t harm her…It’s one thing if you’re a woman who’s a receptionist and they’re just going to go by evoking that sort of traditional, feminine, benevolent sexism. But when women want to be moving into leadership positions, that’s when there are problems and those trade-offs come in… the hostile sexism scale is really suspicious of women’s use of power in general, and there’s always one question on [the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory] that’s about women using sexiness to gain power or using relationships to gain power. (Peter Glick 80 )

As Maysonave states, many of her clients feel pressure from the Hollywood-inspired image norms, which ask women to maintain a level of sex appeal in all facets of their lives – and however “current” or desirable one may seem in a social context when adhering to those norms, Peter Glick’s study suggests that such visual self-presentation decisions are directly relational to the mental and professional power one is not only assumed to have, but of which it is presumed she is capable or incapable.

Similar to Glick’s study, Mary Lynn Damhorst conducted a study (Damhorst and Kimle

1997) in which interviews with 24 women were analyzed for recurring themes in dress images that the interviewees deemed appropriate and acceptable, including business credibility and competence. The study developed a model for dealing with daily professional ambiguities and ambivalences in dress. Throughout the study, the

80 Peter Glick, phone interview by author, February 19, 2007. 97

participants came to a personal realization of how complex their dress strategy must be, as they struggled to balance masculinity and femininity and keep current without looking trendy. The study found that the “ideal” image for professional women is a mix of conservatism, fashion, masculinity, femininity/sexuality, creativity, and conformity – all of which are presented as opposing forces that create tension and require precision and circumspect, vigilant balancing in one’s image management techniques. Damhorst repeated that study in 2002, focusing on managerial level applicants and interview dress.

She chose interview dress as it isolated the most formal, polished presentation of self that may not be repeated on a daily basis, but which sets the tone for the applicant. The original study was conducted in 1991, before it was acceptable for women to wear pants in the workplace, but by 2002, pants were acceptable and prevalent. The findings were quite comparable: In both studies, a-symmetry and anything too “visually interesting” was rated down, as it pulled the focus from the individual and their capabilities and instead centered the attention on the garments. (Susan Dresner points out that while some companies reward distinctive looks, she advises her clients that it is generally considered more acceptable to dress distinctively as you move up the corporate ladder, after you’ve paid your dues.) Suits with men’s tailoring pervaded both studies. While they had anticipated a greater acceptance of shorter skirts in the 2002 study, this was not the case, and it was actively frowned upon. As if quoting Royal’s comment, Damhorst herself referred to the acceptable images in the study as “conservative” and “boring.”

Are there exceptions to the rule? Can a professional woman be feminine, sexy, and successful, without such a heavy mix of conservatism and conformity? 98

Wrapped in Sex, Robed in Confidence: Workin’ It in the Workplace

Field experiment: Prostitute Date: August 13, 2007 35

No Sex in Sight

Costumes and costuming have become such an integral part of my everyday life that it is increasingly difficult to separate the two. In addition to my various sociological identity experiments, I host a monthly karaoke party that is heavily costume-driven. While not all participants dress up, I take it upon myself, as the host, to set the tone: one of non-reality, frivolity, playfulness, and visible whimsy. This usually involves pushing the limits of what is generally regarded as socially acceptable attire. My main outlet and retail hub where I acquire most of these outfits is on 34 th St, between Herald Square and Penn Station. East of Broadway on 34 th St., one finds the standard retail giants like Victoria’s Secret, Banana Republic, Zara, Anne Taylor, and Old Navy (many of which are actually owned by the same corporations), but as one moves west of Macy’s, the stores shift in consumer demographics, style, and price points. It is a predominantly non-white consumer- base on W. 34 th St., and the clothing morphs from generic black pants at a moderate price point in the corporate chains east of Macy’s, to under-$20 trendy styles in non-luxury fabrics west of Macy’s. There is very little on this retail strip that could pass as “professional” attire, unless that profession involves street corners or poles. 99

While many of the stores have colorful offerings that are well-suited for lively events and unusual disguises, there is one in particular that has quickly become my favorite: Cliquer’s. With the tagline, “Join the Clique” and the silhouettes of three Charlie’s Angels-esque women as the logo on their shopping bags, Cliquer’s exudes trendy sassiness. According to their website, they are a family-owned store and have only the one location. It has two levels: First, the ground floor, which has casual women’s clothing that ranges from tank tops and t-shirts to leggings and night-club-oriented dresses, as well as inexpensive jewelry and accessories. (I purchased a pair of large, gold hoop earrings with “Baby Girl” written across them for $2 for one of the karaoke parties.) The lower, basement level is a sea of candy- colored, satin formal dresses, where predominantly African American and Hispanic girls shop for proms, Quinceañeras and other coming-out events, as well as bridesmaid dresses. Cliquer’s offers the girls a one-stop- shopping experience, as formal-dress- appropriate undergarments, satin gloves, rhinestone-clad metallic heels, and even tiaras are available for purchase. They’ve physically divided the store into the two sub-categories of one’s life: the upstairs, everyday section, and the downstairs, 36 event/special occasion sector. Many of the styles at Cliquer’s have a racy quality to them, even more so than the other very similar shops on that strip. It’s a subtle difference, but Cliquer’s selection tends to be just a wee bit tighter and shorter, with accessories that have a tad more flair than its competitors, and an overall more bedazzled kick of glamour. Although I considered venturing into some sex shops to find an outfit for my foray as a prostitute, I decided that Cliquer’s would have some equally scandalous pieces and serve me, as it does the teenage girls, as a one-stop-shop for all the different wardrobe pieces I needed to acquire. I was surprised, however, to find that the general stock was a bit more subdued than usual. Most of the risqué attire had been replaced with more modest baby-doll dresses and empire waist tanks, which simply weren’t prostitute-appropriate. 100

I left Cliquer’s feeling defeated and directionless. The sex shops I passed on 8 th Avenue looked more porn-oriented than wardrobe-heavy, advertising only a few fetish costumes in their windows. After several trips back and forth on 34 th street and a journey up and down 8 th Avenue, I wandered into Beauty 35, what appeared to be a less mainstream version of Ricky’s, and without the irony. I walked directly to the extensive wig section at the back of the store, and one hairpiece caught my eye immediately. It was a dark brown wig with bright reddish-pink highlights intermixed, shaped into an asymmetrical bob. I paid the $0.50 required to purchase a nylon skull cap, with the option of trying on no more than 4 wigs. It was the only one I tried on, and I purchased it immediately for $29.99, which I regarded as a good deal compared to prices at other more glamorous locales. 37 The wig gave me a starting point upon which I could built the rest of the ensemble, so with a renewed vision, I returned to Cliquer’s, determined not to leave empty-handed. I immediately spotted a purple knit “dress” (I’m not sure its length qualified it for “dress” status) with braided metallic pleather that tied around the neck, and a cut-out at the front mid-section. I then found a pink shaped-cup strapless bra with clear plastic straps across the back to wear underneath, knowing it would more than peek out. The mid-section bloused a bit too voluminously, hiding the suggestive cut out, so I grabbed a purple-toned metallic belt with metal studs and cinched it around my waist, pinning back the cut-out for emphasis. I spotted some hot-pink thigh-high fishnet stockings and bought those as a way of brightening up the outfit and drawing more attention to myself, especially since my legs would be such a focal point in the dress. I knew I had large hoop earrings, bangle bracelets, and a sequined clutch at home, meaning I only needed some shoes. Many of the neighboring stores have comparably glittery footwear, but none are quite as extreme as Cliquer’s, which sells clear plastic platforms with 4- inch stiletto heels covered entirely in rhinestones. They were $40 and a bit more of an investment than I wanted to make, but I felt like unconvincing footwear would lessen the impact of the entire outfit, so I went for it. Plus, as suspected, the extreme proportions of the shoes completely altered my carriage and posture, making them a key purchase. Red, matte lips and eyes darkened with black eyeliner was my inclination for a classic prostitute look, which I embellished with purple eye shadow to complement the dress. I have a small mole above my mouth on the left side of my face, and I darkened it slightly with the black eyeliner to create a more dramatic “beauty mark.” I applied some silver fingernail polish, then smeared and chipped it partially off. Finally, I dusted shimmery powder over all exposed skin. Fully-costumed, I felt sexy in a non-pretty sort of way – a type of gritty glamour one doesn’t often 101

experience in everyday life. The extreme shortness of the dress (which kept riding up in the back, demanding attention), coupled with half-exposed breasts and the most uncomfortable footwear I’ve ever worn, induced a feeling of constant physical self-consciousness and awkwardness. The wig and heavy makeup made me feel as if I was dressed in drag, leaving me unrecognizable as my usual self, and giving me the license to confidently embody a persona and physicality that might be judged as “inappropriate,” and even “sad.” In preparation for the day, I’d done some Internet research in an attempt to understand the circumstances that might lead to the arrest of a prostitute. I was surprised to learn that, in addition to the exchange of money for various sex acts, many women were arrested merely for the “intent to solicit” – a charge that was occasionally determined using the “3 condom rule”: a woman in a known prostitute zone, carrying a handbag with a wallet, lipstick, and 3 condoms. Not surprisingly, the charges against women arrested under those conditions, without any other evidence that they had prostituted or planned to prostitute themselves, are almost always dropped and the women are released. I didn’t put any condoms in my bag, as I would not be carrying the experiment that far, nor did I feel their presence would significantly contribute to my ability to get into character, so the “3 condom rule” would be irrelevant to me. It remained unclear, however, even after hours of research, if I could be arrested simply due to the obvious suggestive tone of my dress and geographical positioning. We began on the West Side Highway at 14 th Street, in the Meatpacking District. An area that was once overrun with prostitutes, the Meatpacking is still swarming with equally well- heeled women, only now the cobblestone streets tear apart pricey acquisitions from designer stores like Manolo Blahnik, not Cliquer’s. We stopped to take some photos under a metal awning on a dimly lit street, and a man in a large truck spotted us as he was driving by. The block had several interesting nooks and crannies, and we spent a considerable amount of time there, as did the truck driver, who seemed to have temporarily forgotten he had a destination. Other service men in the area paused to acknowledge me as I walked past, and they all appeared completely oblivious to Darren’s (the photographer) presence. We lingered outside of Hogs and Heifers, and Darren crossed the street, fading slightly into the shadows and allowing me to accumulate stares of titillated confusion from patrons of the bar-top-dancing establishment and men passing on foot or in their cars. It is difficult to determine if they thought I was legitimately out to solicit, and anyone who saw me with Darren probably deduced that that wasn’t the case, but when Darren disappeared and I was seemingly unaccompanied, the nonverbal attention I received told me that with a “Hey baby, lookin’ for a good time?” I probably could have found a few takers. We made our way down the highway to Christopher St., another infamous prostitution area in years past which, much like the Meatpacking, has gentrified and mellowed. However, the block just off the highway on Christopher St., leading across and down to the water, remains a heavily-trafficked cruising strip for young, primarily gay, black prostitutes. The 24-hour porn shop on the corner – one of the last remaining living artifacts from the pre-Giuliani West Village – serves as an appropriate centerpiece for the now-displaced community. 102

38

39 103

40 Every few minutes, a new wave in a seemingly endless stream of people appears suddenly, out of nowhere in particular, and disappears just as quickly. They don’t linger as if that block is their elected territory for idle loitering, but rather, they all appear to be headed toward a particular destination, with a definite purpose. One can assume that that destination is the subterranean water’s edge just ahead, and that the purpose is some type of paid sex act, but to an unknowing observer, the dress and manner of the individual participants does not signal “prostitution” in a stereotypical sense. It was difficult to determine the sexual persuasion of the predominantly male group, even given the homosexual slant to the West Village and the knowledge that that area is particularly popular amongst transvestites. Their demeanor was more polysexual than polarizingly binary in its sexual nature. 41

The fact that I was dressed in unmistakably suggestive attire in two of the most notorious former red light districts of New York, yet failed to see anyone dressed even remotely comparable, is significant for several reasons: One, it reinforces the idea that New York (or at least central Manhattan) is now bereft of a true red light district, removing a specific geographic gathering and soliciting place from local prostitution. Second, it challenges the reactions of individuals who see someone dressed in classic prostitution-wear. The removal of blatant prostitutes from the Manhattan streets leaves the citizens without a socially-directed mode of conduct in relationship to those would- be sex workers. Previously, the sight of a prostitute may have induced an extreme response leaning either toward appropriately horrified and disgusted or openly turned-on and interested in negotiating an exchange. Now, 104

however, the total absence of any blatant, visible street prostitution presence leaves the majority of onlookers more inclined toward non-titillated, mesmerized stares, as if looking at an alien novelty object or someone only seen in movies, and the provocatively dressed woman is relegated to an even more compromised state than before, with her sexual (and professional) prowess utterly deflated as she is pushed out of sight. No one would argue that prostitution has actually disappeared with the Disneyfication of Manhattan, but it has, quite literally, disappeared from the city’s perceivable surface. The Internet and escort services advertised in the back of publications like The Village Voice now serve as the more popular outlets for paid sex, leaving the mysterious plain-clothes parade on Christopher St. as a reminder of what the sex trade looks like when it’s visibly silenced: surprisingly unsexy.

While women in most professional circumstances are not arrested for the suggestive tone of their dress, that does not mean that the penalties for displaying overt sexiness in a business setting are any less severe or that their consequences aren’t professionally devastating. In my experiment, my audience was left to question my intent to solicit, to question how far I would take it – not because I was actually a prostitute, but because I was able to materialize my imagined self in a visually convincing manner, further demonstrating the possibility of fashion and its ability to prevail over biographical circumstances. When women costume themselves in provocative attire off the street corner and inside offices, however, the message is even more ambiguous. What are they attempting to solicit or suggest? What happens when sexuality dominates a woman’s professional appearance? Does sexiness strip a woman of her potential for power? I believe sexuality is a force whose power is underestimated in professional work environments. By categorically dismissing it as simply “bad” or

“harmful” to a woman’s ability to be taken seriously in the workplace, one underestimates its parallel power for harnessing the possibilities of visual self- presentation and operating as a strategic device for manipulating audience perception. 105

Mary Lynn Damhorst relayed her experience with overt sexuality, not as a professional researcher, but as a university professor who witnesses young women experimenting with sexuality on campus:

The cleavage that shows all the time is astounding to me… I have guys who will talk to me and say, “Do the women know what they’re doing to themselves when they wear themselves [like that]?” They read it as a sexual message and that is it. I worry that young people are fooling themselves into thinking that, “It makes me look powerful, and being sexy is powerful.” Well, apparently a lot of men have a very different idea about what they want to do with you when they see you dressed like that or get a little confused as to what you mean by that. (Mary Lynn Damhorst 81 )

A prostitute presumably knows “what she’s doing to herself” – and for what end – when she reveals cleavage and hikes up her skirt, and for them, such visual affectations and dress-related manipulations impart a very specific type of social capital. Professional women may also feel they are able to use those classically sexy symbols for the production of social capital and ultimately as tools for empowerment. In Sherry

Maysonave’s image consulting experience, this is a miscalculation that may backfire, as it underestimates biological responses to mating signals – to which the workplace is not immune. Sexiness is not always as simple as wearing stilettos: It can be inherent, transcending the clothing, but it is the blatant flaunting that is potentially detrimental to a woman’s ability to command respect and be taken seriously. Louise, 82 an independent consultant and native New Yorker, 83 strongly agrees that overt sexiness is damaging to

81 Mary Lynn Damhorst, phone interview by author, January 12, 2007.

82 Name and key identifying details changed by request of interviewee, with mutual agreement.

83 Louise worked for a major bank for nearly 20 years, where she created multiple departments, and in addition to her position as a powerful corporate woman, her father founded one of the companies listed in the top 100 of the 2007 Forbes rankings and formerly owned a professional sports team. 106

professional success, based on her years of experience in the field. She goes so far as to offer steadfast rules like “nobody should ever see your toes,” “never have bare legs,” “it can’t be too tight,” and, more generally, “You don’t want to look like junk” (Louise 84 ).

Louise’s intolerance is not just material, but extends into areas that are less concrete, like

an attitude of “availability” and subliminal messages of sexuality, which she argues must

also be managed and harnessed. While I agree with Louise’s emphasis on the necessity

to manage one’s sexual energy, I believe the absoluteness of her “rules of appearance”

are too extreme and old fashioned. Avoiding visible toes and bare legs may have been

the tactical strategy for passing as “unsexy” in previous times, but today’s professional

woman can frequently get away with breaking those rules, without projecting an overt or

offensive sexual persona. In fact, as Sylvia Moss recounts, there are instances where

sexy femininity is actively embraced by senior-level professional women, seemingly

without penalty, and perhaps in their favor:

There is a woman at [a major New York law firm]. She is one of the most professional partners at [that firm]. She is in the hedge fund arena, which is the up-and-coming and the hottest arena there is. She has long, blonde hair; she wears great skirts and high heels. So, yeah, is her look hurting her? No, because the minute she opens her mouth, everybody knows she’s the smartest person in the room, and she brings a business orientation to the law that some other competitors of hers would not bring. I don’t know – I couldn’t tell you – whether or not her dress has anything negative to do with her role and how far she’s succeeded at [that firm], but she’s certainly regarded within the hedge fund arena as being a real player – and she’s got her long, blonde hair and her short skirts and her high heels…I don’t think it matters what we wear. I don’t think it matters whether we wear high heels or we wear pant suits or we wear short skirts. I think that what matters is the fact that we’re still women in a man’s world, and however we are regarded, we will always be regarded as

84 Louise, interview by author, New York, NY, April 25, 2007.

107

women – well, hopefully one year, after I’m dead, there will be women who will be regarded in a different manner, but not yet. (Sylvia Moss 85 )

Moss’s example may be dismissed as an anomaly, as some women are able to break the conventional rules and still excel But most image consultants advise against an appearance that draws too much attention, as it may be considered distracting and ultimately un-business-like. I recognize the dangers against which they warn, but I do not believe in absolute rules for guaranteed success, not only because I think appearance is more nuanced and complex than it is formulaic, but also because the elements of sexuality that go beyond dress cannot always be concealed and need not be accentuated by them to exercise their potency. Narin 86 is a Jordanian twenty-something of Palestinian descent. She moved to Buffalo, New York for college and has been in the U.S. ever since. Since 2004, she has worked at a major international investment bank in New York

City. “I’m graced with certain features. I have a big chest. Let me put it this way. Let me be frank. So, without effort, it’s pretty obvious. Initially, I thought it was going to be an issue, but I decided I also wanted to look good and to feel good about my assets…When I wear something a bit tight, people notice” (Narin 87 ). Narin, while unable

to make her physical features invisible, does not downplay them or her femininity within

her professional life. I also spoke with another Middle Eastern woman, Layla, who had a similar attitude about the relationship between sexuality and professionalism. Layla is a

85 Sylvia Moss, interview by author, New York, NY, December 28, 2006.

86 Name and key identifying details changed by request of interviewee, with mutual agreement.

87 Narin, interview by author, June 9, 2007.

108

Persian socialite who has lived in New York since the early 80’s – just after the Iranian

Revolution . She is married to an American, with whom they have two teenage boys, and she considers herself an American. She owns her own high-end jewelry manufacturing business and lives on the Upper East Side. Perhaps contrary to popular American opinion, Narin and Layla think women in the U.S. project a less sexy, safer, more boring image than Middle Eastern women in an attempt to appear professional and classy.

Maybe this is why you hear, when you’re overseas, that the American woman is so masculine and rigid and not that attractive for that. They’re so, I don’t know, angry-looking always…We [Americans] are ashamed of being flirty, we’re sort of defensive towards these things… And you’re all square. God forbid someone can see your boobs. I mean, I don’t show mine, but I admire the one that does. I truly do. I think it’s fabulous. We forget ourselves in many ways…I was just in Paris with my [sons]…They said to me, “Mommy, the women are so beautiful and they dress so well. I love to be in Paris.” [The Parisian women] are not necessarily…any more beautiful than anywhere else, but it’s the way that they put themselves together…they are feminine and they are sexy looking. They’re refined. They dress well. You like to look at them…And they’re soft. We’re harsh here, and we become harsh as we live here. (Layla 88 )

[The] international women…[are] better dressed. I wouldn’t say more attractive, but [take] better care of their appearances. [More attention to detail] than the American women…they look very smart with their makeup and hair and dresses…Older…white, American…women…tend to be less concerned with their looks. And I think it’s a cultural thing. Because, back home [in Jordan] and in other places…we’re obsessive about [looks]…When I go home, I get reminded. They don’t believe that I’m like this or, how did I go out wearing this. There are certain things that I would wear in the US that I wouldn’t even think of wearing [in Jordan]. And it’s not even that I’m trying to be conservative or anything. Fashion is a big thing. To go to the store back home, you have to be very well dressed with the hair and the makeup and everything. And you’re just going to the store. And so, I’ve learned to calm this down once I came to the States, but back home, every minute [you are made up]. (Narin 89 )

What drives this relative conservatism? Is America merely a country of sexually- repressed workaholics who don’t value aestheticism – or at least can’t marry the idea of

88 Layla, interview by author, July 9, 2007.

89 Narin, interview by author, June 9, 2007.

109

beauty and professionalism? Do the sexless streets reflect a general intolerance for public displays of sexuality and an attempt to silence the potency of the body? The U.S. is a country where women are permitted – at least in theory – to achieve and excel at the same level as men. Despite this “freedom,” women continue to strive for equality in the workplace, positioning them as minorities and making them vulnerable to critiques, not the least of which may be with regard to their visual self-presentation. Thus, I believe it is not so much a national inability to unite the ideals of professionalism and beauty, but rather, the blanket fear of sexual display is a reflection of the still-present gap between the sexes in the workplace – one in which sexuality is but one factor that may either contribute to or pull from a woman’s social and professional capital.

Confidence, however, may overshadow materiality. Oksana 90 , a Russian woman who has lived in the U.S. for several years, is an associate director at a major investment bank in New York City. She places a strong emphasis on confidence: “If I look good, I am more confident and get things done quicker, because people are more open and cooperating. People like well-dressed, good-looking people. It is the nature” (Oksana 91 ).

Confidence is comparably highlighted by Allison Aston, who believes appropriateness is determined more by attitude than by any specific sartorial recipe.

It’s all about the emotional connection that you have when you put something on…Even if it is a little low-cut, that doesn’t mean that it’s not still professional, it just depends on how you personally perceive it… It’s the way you perceive yourself and I think that you’re sending off those kinds of signals to somebody else… There is somebody here who dresses extremely

90 Name and key identifying details changed by request of interviewee, with mutual agreement.

91 Oksana, interview by author, June 1, 2007. 110

provocatively, in my opinion, but looks terrific and looks completely professional. She has a blazer on and you can absolutely see the bra that she’s intentionally showing. And she looks great, and again, she looks completely professional. If I wore that, I would feel like I was completely exposing myself, and I would act like it. I would be awkward and people would be like, “What is she wearing?” But because this is just the way she is and this is her personal style, it makes her feel a certain confidence, where it would take my confidence away. (Allison Aston 92 )

Thus, Oksana and Aston’s commentaries serve as examples of how confidence may transcend any single fashion rule or garment of clothing (in contrast to Louise’s perspective). According to Sherry Maysonave, image management hinges on personal attitude and how we process feedback from viewers, which in turn affects our confidence.

Confidence, however, stems from many factors, one of which is physical stature. A disproportionate number of the women I interviewed within the social and professional spheres were tall. I don’t have exact measurements on all the women, but most of them were 5’6 and over, ranging up to nearly 6’ feet tall (the average height for an American woman is 5’4). According to a Stanford Graduate School of Business interview with

Lara Tiedens (Neilson 2007), an organizational behavior professor at the school, dominance displays are linked with status acquisition (a statement that helps to explain why the last U.S. president who was shorter than the current average for an American man (5’9) was William McKinley, 106 years ago at 5’7 – which was considered average for its time). Height is a key visual clue that communicates dominant behavior and can give certain individuals an edge – an edge that several of my interviewees acknowledge and enjoy:

92 Allison Aston, interview by author, New York, NY, April 11, 2007. 111

I’m 5’9…I’m lucky, I’m tall. So I don’t have the shoes that many women probably have because they’re short. And I can go toe-to-toe with most of the guys in this firm. And I’m taller than some, and I’m as tall as others. And yeah, there are men who are taller than I, but I am not short. And that means I have a level of presence that just is because I’m tall, because I was lucky…and that’s what’s important…is this whole concept of presence. When [I’m] 5’9, and I walk into a room, I know I’m commanding that room, just because I am 5’9 and I have a certain personality – which is a strong personality – so I walk into a room and there is a level of presence. If that’s missing, you know that instantly. I know that instantly. It’s a self-confidence, it’s a sense of security, it’s a sense of well-being – it’s all of those things. And I think it’s more difficult for women and I think especially it’s more difficult for women who are petite – a diminutive. And I think they have to overcome [that more much]. It’s not fair, but that’s the world…I just think it’s easier for me to be recognized, I think that if I have something to say, it’s just easier because you’re taller. (Sylvia Moss 93 )

I love wearing heels and I love to be tall. You know, I don’t mind being 5’7 and wearing three inch heels that make me 5’10. Being able to see eye-to-eye with anybody you’re negotiating a contract with or doing anything with [makes a difference]. (Sandra Timte 94 )95

I only wear flats when I’m stressed out…I like [being] bigger than the guys…I’m walking to work and I’m wearing flip flops. As soon as I change into my high heels, it’s a totally different confidence that you have. (Narin 96 )

Oksana, (a tall woman) who comes from a long line of professional women, described her great-grandmother, who was a female banking executive over 70 years ago – an anomaly in Moscow (or anywhere) at that time: “She was a beautiful woman. Tall.

Always standing straight. She would always pinch my back and tie in my elbows so I would stand up straight and sit properly” (Oksana 97 ). However, this stature and presence is not limited exclusively to biological height, and Tieden clarifies the classification to

93 Sylvia Moss, interview by author, New York, NY, December 28, 2006.

94 Sandra Timte, phone interview by author, January 19, 2007.

95 A Houston-based woman of social and professional prominence who will be discussed in greater detail in subsequent chapters.

96 Narin, interview by author, June 9, 2007.

97 Oksana, interview by author, June 1, 2007.

112

include various tactics through which people may “take up space” and give off the

“appearance of height.” This height-illusion, as it may be, affords even relatively shorter individuals a “subliminal sense of power” (Jones 2007). When extended to the use of elevated footwear by professional women, this argument catapults high-heels beyond their historical and social legacy as traditional symbols of conspicuous leisure, and positions them as legitimate facilitators for the negotiation of power. As Allison Aston declares, “There’s something about wearing a strong shoe that just gets me going”

(Allison Aston 98 ).

If the initial appearance of a woman in a suit demonstrated her mythic independence from the role of mother-nurturer, and the Chanel suit in particular evolved that image away from “women masquerading as men” to a visual declaration of different- yet-equal, then where on the pendulum is the professional woman of today? Alex

Chantecaille 99 grounds her own modern, professional image in the projection of

naturalness:

I think if there’s any kind of ‘uniform’ today it’s natural…I think, if you’re going to talk about the feminization in the workplace, what you had was, “I am woman, I must look like a woman, but I must look similar everyday to be taken seriously” because the guy wears the tie and the suit as a uniform everyday. So, I think now, you can [say], “I am woman, but I’m comfortable and I’m natural and I’m going to wear flats if I want and grow my hair super long and look youthful. I’m also going to wear makeup in a way that makes me feel good, but that can also be creative and fun and in-step with the trends. That’s my decision and I can get away with doing that. And I can look different from one day to the next and get away with that.” So, I think there’s more fun, whimsy, and control connected to it. It’s fast-

98 Allison Aston, interview by author, New York, NY, April 11, 2007.

99 Chantecaille is the daughter of Sylvie Chantecaille, the co-creator, along with Estée Lauder, of Prescriptives cosmetics, and the founder of Chantecaille cosmetics, for which Chantecaille is the Sales Director.

113

changing like the fashions. And the important underlying thing is always looking like yourself…and comfortable. (Alex Chantecaille 100 )

Chantecaille’s perspective raises the key issue of youthfulness in modern visual self- presentation. I argue that one is not simply guaranteed success in exchange for shunning cleavage-baring blouses and limiting one’s professional wardrobe to closed-toed shoes and conservative suits. Rather, it is a by-product of this “natural” comfortability to which

Chantecaille alludes. Her instinct is that creativity and whimsy are of equal importance to visual nods to convention, which suggests that youthful freshness can compensate for and contradict many other visual mistakes or shortcomings, such as overt sexiness.

Image consultants can facilitate this appearance management, and championing the suit is not passé, but the modern look of success is more concerned with age-defying sophistication than with tradition. One must, however, “live in the cracks,” to quote

Goffman, as even youthfulness must temper itself in an effort to balance personal dynamism with group acceptance by living a life of “distinguished compliance” – which will be discussed in the following chapter.

100 Alex Chantecaille, interview by author, New York, NY, April 19, 2007. 114

CHAPTER 5

UNIFORMITY, CONFORMITY, AND REBELLION: ERASURE AND EMPHASIS IN VISUAL SELF-PRESENTATION

42 No clothing is foreign, though it may be strange. (Hollander 1994, 198)

Distinguished Compliance: Obedience and Individuality in Social Appearance

Success is not a simple formula, as demonstrated in the previous chapter, but one is rarely successful exclusively through personal distinction: In addition to imagining and maintaining a fresh visual image, one must also foster some element of compliance – a balance I refer to as “distinguished compliance” – in which obedience to the fashion code and to the socially-prescribed visual formula is of equal importance to the development of one’s individual social appearance. Throughout this chapter, I will 115

explore the issues of uniformity and conformity as they compete with the rebellion instinct, and the ways in which this struggle can lead to either erasure or emphasis in visual self-presentation. This section focuses on the role of uniforms and tactics for visual “correctness,” a photography project that addresses and captures the relationship between conformity and distinction, and a scientific experiment on obedience that reveals the depth of one’s commitment to compliance to authority. In the following section, I use veiling and gender subversion as a lens for examining outlets for rebellion within restrictive dress codes, which are animated via sartorial subversion – an act of masking that has the power to both conceal and reveal. Throughout the chapter, the issue of imagination in visual self-presentation underlies the text, as power is fashioned through the strategies and predilections one employs for living in the cracks.

The communicative quality of fashion is addressed by Alison Lurie in The

Language of Clothes (2000), which relates fashion to language while extending it beyond

the reaches of language, arguing that clothing crosses gender, race, ethnic, and linguistic

boundaries, acting as its own universal dialect. Lurie’s contribution supports my

argument that meaning is not inherent in the garment, nor is it inherently fashionable; this

changes with the times. An individual’s native dress, worn in a context other than that of

its origin, can be read as a foreign language, the nuances of which are frequently

misunderstood. Similarly, “mixing garments” can send a confusing message to viewers.

Lurie uses the example of a braless executive woman, the image of which creates an issue

around the discrepancy between intention and interpretation – a problem addressed in the

previous chapter. Dress, like language, is complex, and there are no simple statements. 116

An attempt to streamline, unify, and control these projected images is the theoretical justification for institutionalized dress codes. However, theses rules of visual conduct are not always well-received. “Most people do not want to be told what to wear any more than they want to be told what to say…Fashion is free speech” (Lurie 2000, 36). One hears echoes of Kant, Simmel, Hegel, and Vischer in this statement, as they, like me, all wrestle with this dialectic between expressive freedom and collective uniformity.

The issue of expression versus conformity is actively embodied and re-energized by the on-going debate on uniforms. Before asking the question, “Are uniforms hepful or harmful?” it is interesting to first address a question posed by Daniel Purdy, who asks whether fashion operates as a divisive or harmonizing force within modern democracies:

“Is fashion a force that continuously disrupts established social norms, or does it cover up entrenched class and gender relations by projecting an illusion of democratic opportunity through consumerism?” (Purdy 2004, 13). As if in answer to this question, Simmel

(1971), Vischer (2004), and J.C. Flugel (1930), all contend that modern fashion has a social “leveling” affect as a result of its uniformity, but I side with Samuel Simon Witte, who directly addresses the question of enforced uniformity and its impact on democratic society in “An Answer to the Question: Would it Be Harmful or Beneficial to Establish a

National Uniform?” (1791 (in Purdy 2004)). Witte lobbies against a national uniform, asserting that the freedom of dress is an essential element of public society. 101 In “An

101 This piece is an extension of Kant’s essay on public speech, “What is Enlightenment,” (1991 (1970)), in which Kant declares that “a high degree of civil freedom seems advantageous to a people’s intellectual freedom” and that “governments…can themselves profit by treating man, who is more than a machine, in a manner appropriate to his dignity” (Kant 1991, 59-60). 117

Answer to the Question,” Witte uses Kant’s argument to comment on the importance of personal expression through clothing.

Perhaps it may not be difficult to demonstrate that the costume and its fashion have a greater power over the character and mores of a people than do all laws and police regulations; a power that is to be granted it all the more in that the costume exerts its effects silently, without force, and promotes social contact without requiring any other measure or preliminaries. (Witte 1791 (in Purdy 2004), 76)

To restrict one’s public dress is comparable to an infringement upon one’s personal

liberties, and is therefore a detriment to the healthy functioning of an open society.

Freedom of speech becomes intertwined in one’s freedom to appear.

Anne Hollander argues that most people dress in an effort to look “right,” not

fashionable (Hollander 1994, 11). They are comforted not so much by physical ease as

mental safety in visual “rightness,” which is bred by the satisfaction and feeling of

completeness derived from self-knowledge. Hollander calls for a type of personal

performance consciousness – not merely a mental snapshot of one’s appearance. Despite

a certain communal rebellion against formal dress codes and occasion-specific dress

expectations, visual conformity remains at the core of social comfort. While I agree with

Hollander’s assertion about the human desire for visual correctness, I do not believe that

mandatory uniforms are the answer. However, as demonstrated by some of my

interviewees, visual correctness can be an insurmountable to challenge to even the

keenest individuals. Sandra Timte is one such example. Although she comes from a

modest background (her parents were cotton farmers in Texas), she has risen to the top of

the Houston community both professionally and socially. Her life has had three distinct

periods: first was her professional phase as a corporate attorney, then she transitioned into 118

a stay-at-home mother, and now she’s moved into a period that is focused on social and civic activities. She hired an image consultant from Sherry Maysonave’s company,

Empowerment Enterprises, to help her negotiate her public persona and her transition from a domestic daily routine to a very public social life – a decision motivated, in part, by situations like the one described below, in which she lacked that comfort and feeling of rightness described by Hollander.

I was always very successful professionally. I knew that my clothing certainly wasn’t holding me back, it was working. It wasn’t until I got into a much more high society group than I was used to being in, and the need to be able to dress to accommodate that [lifestyle demanded some outside image assistance]…The National Charity League circle [is] a lot of the country club people… I just make so many mistakes there. There’s definitely a need to dress to conform….I never have been a good dresser, it’s either I’m underdressed or overdressed. I like to be in the middle of the road, neither under nor over but just looking confident. I know one event I went to at the Junior League, it was a senior style show and the ladies were absolutely dressed to kill. [My daughter], Julie, and I came in Sunday evening [casual] clothes. I learned after that to call and find out what people are wearing to those things… People pretty much comply. If anybody’s dressed inappropriately, it’s probably me. God just left that gene out of me. There’re probably a lot of things I have a lot of talent for. One of them is not being able to figure out what to wear, which is why I sought out a professional. (Sandra Timte 102 )

Timte’s inability to anticipate the visual norms of the situation was hindering her level of acceptance within and, consequently, her overall viability within the group. However, image consultants are not a feasible solution for most people, leaving many without the ability to successfully present their ideal self in accordance with the visual standards, and therefore unable to collect on an accrue the valuable social capital that accompanies visual correctness. This problem leads Hollander to argue that uniforms, contrary to popular belief, are what people secretly prefer, in order to avoid feeling foolish as a result of their inadequate social appearance:

102 Sandra Timte, phone interview by author, January 19, 2007. 119

Uniforms, so vigorously despised in much current rhetoric about clothes, are really what most people prefer to wear, garments in which they feel safely similar to their fellows. Once in uniform, they can choose their personal details, feel unique, and then sneer at members of other tribes who all seem ridiculously alike in their tribal gear. (Hollander 1994, 185)

Although it is impossible to determine whether people secretly desire strictly enforced uniformity in exchange for mental ease, I disagree with her and find that line of logic too reductive, as I believe the need for creative outlets in visual display is at least as powerful

– if not more so – than one’s need for social safety. The extent to which uniforms foster higher-quality, more committed service is debatable. Employees may not need a uniform to convey their ability to effectively serve, but a uniform is not only about functionality – it’s also about branding, as they mark one’s affiliation with one’s place of employment and blur one’s sense of identity. 103 Having or not having uniforms is not really the issue, however, as personal flair emanates via fit, bodily form, and the previously discussed, elusive quality of confidence, even within the most restrictive regimes.

Some professional executives, like Sylvia Moss, lobby on behalf of personal judgment over an overabundance of company policies on dress at their respective companies. Harold Koda relays a story where the need for individual outlets overshadowed the prescribed visual standards:

I was once in Charles de Gaulle Airport back in the ‘80s and saw some Chinese bureaucrats. There were several women and more men, but at least three women in this group, and they were all wearing pant-suits, like the men…What fascinated me was that there was a range of colors. It wasn’t just navy blue and black. It was navy blue, black, dark forest green, brown, some winter colors. Also, their collars all had some variation. They weren’t all the simple rounded collar: some had points, some were narrow. So, obviously, even within this uniform that was intended to obliterate difference and unify political/social/economic identity, there was individualization. I think that this is an

103 A topic that will be explored in Chapter 7: Embodied Branding. 120

example where even [in] forms of dress that are resistant to modification, there are still opportunities for individualization. Of course, it’s hard to do this, and the subversive nature of modifying a unified aesthetic of dress is necessarily subtle to elude general detection. But maybe that makes those changes more acute, because it means you have to be more attentive to them to be able to assert yourself. (Harold Koda 104 )

43

Koda’s use of the word “acute” underlines the sharpness required to exercise personal difference and claim power in contexts where an acceptable aesthetic variation is limited. He also uses the example of Japanese school children, all of whom are required to wear school uniforms. The students, however, look anything but uniform, as they adopt personal marks of distinction by rolling up their skirts or wearing baggy socks. Despite the fact that they’re all wearing standard issue garments, they inflect their appearance to symbolize smaller group identities.

104 Harold Koda, interview by author, New York, NY, February 1, 2007. 121

44 The contexts in which uniforms are worn (i.e. a

UPS uniform worn on one’s day off), further

contributes to how the individual, in relationship to

the garment, is understood and read by one’s

audience. As previously stated, the fit of the

garment equally frames how it is perceived, as the

way in which the garment interacts with the body

can transcend the uniformity of its design. Standard

issue garments that are not made to fit, such as a

Tyvek NASA suit (pictured at left), are one of the

rare examples where the uniform is actually “just a

uniform,” as it essentially erases the body,

drastically altering the public perception of the individual’s identity and limiting one’s

outlets for personal expression.

This struggle for distinguished compliance is masterfully captured by

photographer Ari Versluis and stylist Ellie Uyttenbroek, the Dutch masterminds behind

the “Exactitudes” project. 105 I met with them at their Rotterdam studio in 2007 to discuss the project and their vision of their work. A linguistic synthesis of “exact” and “attitude,”

“Exactitudes,” which means “precise,” began in 1994 as a photographic exploration of the dress codes of social groups. It lives up to its name by attempting to “be precise in the

105 See www.exactitudes.com for more information and photos from the series.

122

way people want to distinguish themselves…We are talking about exact attitudes and how people have the same attitudes in their clothing” (Ari Versluis 106 ) – an extension of

Koda’s reference to an “acute” precision in personal differentiation via strategic visual

modifications. By photographing the subjects of each series in a similar pose (which is

derived from the body postures the subjects instinctually fall into during the shoot and is

not imposed upon them by the artists) and visual framework, they highlight the dress

code at work within the different subgroups. 12 portraits are chosen for each series; none

of the subjects are ever paid and they always wear their own clothing. Each series is

given a title – usually after the series is complete – which appears at the bottom, along

with the year and city in which the photographs were taken. 107

“Exactitudes” is a commentary on the negotiation between individuality and

belonging, as the subjects attempt to distinguish themselves through their visual

conformity to the group’s identity. The project explores a semi-scientific, calculated

approach to image management. From a distance, the 12 individuals look extremely

homogenous – sometimes they even appear to be the same person. Ari describes it as

“one image consisting of 12 portraits” (Ari Versluis 108 ). When they are examined in

106 Ari Versluis, interview by author, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, April 2, 2007. 107 A brief, poetic, almost stream-of-consciousness description is provided for each series at the back of their book, though it is not exhibited on or near the original photographs or in gallery showings: i.e. “Leathermen: International fetish men in chaps and caps. Men2men exhibitionists. Masters of cloning – Tom of Finland is their registered trademark. Cockrings, titclamps, hanky-codes. Enjoy!”; “Manipulators: Narcissistic workout-energiser-supplement addicts. Already at 17 sculpting their bodies to perfection. Boys can have tits too!”; “Mohawks: Punk never dies!.” They do not regard these descriptors as authoritative commentaries, however, as they think of themselves as the “image makers” – not the social scientists.

108 Ari Versluis, interview by author, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, April 2, 2007. 123

greater detail, however, their individualizations are illuminated: a sideways shot of 12 mohawks (see “Mohawk” on page 126 of this dissertation) offers a strikingly similar silhouette, but while the general form is the same, the color and style nuances differentiate the individuals within that social group, demonstrating the ways in which that particular subculture demonstrates membership in the group, while still preserving space for individual expression. The body and the grooming rituals and techniques performed in relationship to it are highlighted in the photos: one series uses no visible clothing at all – only similarly toned bodies that suggest a communal physical fitness routine that extends visual self-presentation beyond clothing, placing the emphasis on the body itself (see “Manipulators” on page 130 of this dissertation). The absence of clothing and prominence of the flesh in those photographs present different challenges for understanding the social dynamics of the group (which will be explored in Chapter 6,

“Commodified Flesh”). The photographs also demonstrate the extent to which bodily affectation can overrule sex and project androgyny (see the “Dreads” series on page 130 of this dissertation) – a topic that will be explored in the following section. 109

109 While they plan to continue to capture time and trends indefinitely through their ongoing work on “Exactitudes,” Versluis and Uyttenbroek have also been commissioned to do a similar photography series on the European Union – specifically, the ways in which the strong nationalistic identities (i.e. German, French, etc.) are increasingly superseded by a larger “European” and, ultimately, global identity. While their work usually focuses on subcultures within specific cities, they are now choosing categorizations, like the “Apple man” (an individual obsessed with Apple products), and photographing that type across numerous cities.

124

45 46

125

47 48 “Gabbers” “Manipulators”

“Mohawk” 49 “Dreads” 50

126

“Students” 51 “Leathermen” 52

“Homeboys” 53 “Formers” 54

127

Versluis and Uyttenbroek’s work is significant and relevant in that they are documenting snapshots of culture in an artistic manner, but it is not dissimilar from the data that might be collected from a visual sociologist. While they do not offer commentary or attempt to critique the social dynamic within the montages they assemble, they provide valuable fodder for sociological inquiries on distinguished compliance within visual self-presentation, as well as issues of physical manipulation and body/clothing relationships, all of which are central to the topic of fashioning power.

Further, their project captures images of social groups from specific geographical regions over a significant span of time (over ten years thus far), which serves as an invaluable tool for visual sociological analysis and presents an opportunity for art and the social sciences to create a complementary working dialogue.

From December 2006 – January 2007, the Anna Kustera Gallery in New York ran an exhibition entitled “i drank the kool-aid: (The Experiment Requires That You

Continue).” The exhibition looked at the relationship between obedience (to authority) and conformity (to one’s peers) and featured pieces from the Exactitudes project. 110 It took its name from the study conducted by Dr. Stanley Milgram at Yale University in the early 1960’s. In the study, volunteers were told that they were participating in a “study of memory and learning,” and the group was divided up between “teachers” (the actual volunteers) and “learners” (undercover actors). The teachers watched as the learners were strapped into an electric chair and were told that for every pair of words the learner could not remember, he/she would be given an electric shock of increasing intensity. The

110 See www.annakustera.com/2007/02/i_drank_the_koolaid_images.html for images from the exhibition. 128

teachers were then escorted into another room where they were instructed on how to administer the shock treatment to the learners (who never actually received the shock, but whose fake cries of pain could be heard by the teachers). The learners frequently banged on the wall and expressed health concerns as a result of the shock, at which point many of the teachers requested permission to check on the learner. If they expressed a desire to discontinue their involvement in the exercise, they were given a series of verbal commands by the administrator:

1. Please continue. 2. The experiment requires that you continue. 3. It is absolutely essential that you continue. 4. You have no other choice, you must go on.

If, after all four commands were given, the participant still wanted to stop, the administrator stopped pressing and discontinued the experiment.

The results were shocking to the experimenters. Before conducting the study, they anticipated that only around 1% of the participants would be willing to inflict the maximum voltage. However, 65% of the participants actually administered the full 450- volt shock, and no one adamantly refused prior to the 300-volt shock. 111 Milgram later made a documentary film entitled Obedience to showcase and publicize his findings. The exhibition showcased these surprising results, as they relate to larger issues of social conformity:

Dr. Milgram’s experiment exposed the relative ease by which an individual will carry out the wishes of an authority figure sublimating their own moral, ethical and individual beliefs.

111 Milgram, Stanley. “Behavioral Study of Obedience,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 67 (1963): 371-378; Stanley Milgram. Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View (New York: HarperCollins, 1974); StanleyMilgram.com, http://www.stanleymilgram.com . 129

Simply put, the shock generator stands as a symbol of the lengths to which 60% to 85% of any given sample of humans will go to carry out orders. Artists, by their nature, observe and interpret human behavior from both within and outside society. The works in this show are varied examples of the costs and benefits of conformity – the use and abuse of peer pressure both within mainstream and counter cultures, exploration of group dynamics, as well as the relinquishing of personal responsibility in the presence of an authority figure. (http://www.annakustera.com/2006/12/i_drank_the_koolaid.html )

The experiment, and the exhibition derived from it, reinforces the influence of authority and the degree to which individuals are willing to participate in what is expected of them.

This pressure to conform is reflected in one’s visual self-presentation. Norms of appearance and standards of beauty are subliminally cemented and frequently followed by even the most critically-minded individuals. The experiment demonstrates the extent to which human obedience and conformity to the authority of an individual, an institution, or a group, may overrule personal judgment and any expression of individuality. While the experiment linked one’s compliance with physical and ethical consequences, it is not much of a stretch to imagine circumstances in which obedience in dress and submission to visual expectations can have similar ramifications, as explored in the next section. 130

Sartorial Subversion: Revealing and Concealing through Defiant Dress

Field Experiment: Veiling Date: June 12, 2007

55 Veiled Vanity

No one would ever describe me as a modest dresser. I don’t like to be subtle or blend in, and I rarely wear loose, baggy clothing. Form-fitted attire with a flair is much more my style. I shy away from hats, even in the winter. Perhaps that’s due in part to the fact that I love hair and would hate to either hide or flatten it. I don’t wear much make-up, but I never leave the house without applying lip gloss – not even to run to the deli on my corner. That tiny bit of glisten and color is one way I transform my look from the backstage setting of my apartment into my public persona; it signals my awareness that people are looking and silently judging. I grew up with my Irish Catholic mother in the Midwest, but my father is Persian and still lives in Iran. My hair, eyes, and olive skin tone are all dark like my father’s, but I still manage to resemble my mother (according to most people who know us). However, the shape of my eyes and broad cheeks give away my Middle Eastern heritage to knowing observers. The veil was the most obvious first choice for my visual self-presentation experiment. My mother left Tehran while pregnant with me in 1978, just prior to the Iranian revolution. Had she chosen to stay, it is fairly certain the veil would have become part of my everyday existence, forcing me to surrender my love of impractical footwear and Spandex. The fact that I only 131

narrowly escaped a life shrouded in government-imposed dress regulations was no doubt a factor in my decision to try on the veil, if only for a day. A head-covering is the most ubiquitous symbol of female Muslim dress, but I needed to understand the larger visual picture of its everyday cultural significance to effectively and convincingly portray the role. One Muslim website, www.submission.org (“Islam” literally translates as “submission”), offers a guide to Muslim dress codes, as dictated by the Koran. It includes the following principles:

• Wear the “best garment,” which is one of righteousness • Cover your breasts 56 • Lengthen your garments • Wear loose-fitting clothing • Dress modestly and don’t draw attention • Be clean and decent, but not flashy • Wear thick fabric to hide the skin’s color • Proudly dress as a Muslim, and if female, don’t imitate a man • Cover the entire body; only the hands and feet should remain visible

The website clarifies that the exact method of detracting attention – and the way in which that translates into the garments – was never clearly laid out in the Koran and is an on-going subject of debate within the various sectors of the Muslim community, as there is nothing specifically stated with regard to color, fabric, or design. These preferences are more heavily influenced by local tradition, and some would argue that the veil itself is more about cultural tradition than Islam, as many believe that the Koran doesn’t require Muslim women to cover themselves at all times. Irrespective of the debates, modesty is at the forefront of the projected image. Appearance, however, is but one facet of this modesty: one’s behavior, manners, and speech must also align. 132

57 I used the veil as the central piece around which I would build the costume. After calling several local mosques, I learned that a man sold Muslim clothing outside of a mosque on 29 th Street. I stopped by one afternoon and paid $5 for a cranberry colored, pull-over head scarf with decorative trim. It fit tightly around the perimeter of my face (keeping my hair securely hidden beneath it), and cascaded down just below my shoulders, fully covering my neck and collar bones. The day we chose for the outing was expected to reach into the 70’s, and I knew I would need to cover my entire body for the exercise, so I searched for loose-fitting, light-weight clothing that would allow air to move between my body and the garments. I selected an oversized, taupe, long- sleeved, crew-neck t-shirt that I would normally only wear to bed, and wide-legged, tan pants with an elastic waistband. Both pieces de-emphasized my shape and flowed freely around my body, concealing any physical curvatures. I wore plain black socks inside my unassuming black clogs. Grooming was fairly non-existent, as I wore no make-up (only sheer, non-glossy chapstick to moisturize my lips), no fingernail polish or jewelry, and my hair was not visible. I carried a brown, non-designer hand-bag which is in good condition and has no labels. 58 133

The generously cut clothing made me feel as if I were in my pajamas, and I had to acclimate to the idea of leaving my house in that state. Pajamas are not generally intended for public viewing, and when those normally private clothes combined with the veil, I felt completely invisible, as if I were a non-entity passing down the street. This was a striking contrast to the feeling of confidence and visibility that I usually experience in public. We began in my neighborhood of Hell’s Kitchen. I walked a few paces ahead of my photographer, Darren. I could feel my energy draw in as I walked along, casting a subtle gaze at passersby, but rarely receiving eye contact in return. A few men stared longer than usual, with a puzzled look on their faces, as if deep in thought as to why anyone would want to cover themselves like that. We traveled south to the Meatpacking District, the hip hangout for the wealthy and beautiful. Lingering casually in front of Pastis – a trendy landmark – I paused to take in the cultural contrast between my physicality and that of the restaurant’s patrons: immaculately- groomed women and their financially prosperous counterparts, juxtaposed with my head-to-toe expression of modesty. I felt frumpy and unattractive; asexual, androgynous, altogether unfeminine, and the embodiment of “anti-hip.”

59

We made our way east to Washington Square Park, a site at which I spent a huge portion of my first year in New York when I was a freshman in the adjacent NYU dorm. I would stop by the park before, between, and after classes, and I logged some serious park time most evenings and weekends, as well. It was never a place for studying or reading or any type of marked productivity for me. Rather, the park was my looking glass, the lens through which I acclimated to the city, and ultimately, to myself. A bustling hub of diversity, it offered me a microcosm of my world in the contained space of my front yard, and I wanted to examine each citizen scrupulously, silently, with my eyes. I don’t have the chance to participate in those luxurious Washington Square staring sessions as much anymore, but whenever I wander through again, I automatically 134

60

61 135

switch into observation mode. The veil didn’t change that voyeuristic desire, but it did alter my execution, as my own feelings of invisibility granted me unofficial permission to hold my gaze more intently. Perhaps they didn’t notice my stare – or maybe they were too self-conscious about hinting at their own recognition of difference, and didn’t acknowledge my own palpable eyeballing. I headed to the center of the action: the circular water fountain. The water was on that day, so there were no street performers taking advantage of the captive, amphitheater audience. Instead, sunbathers and weekend relaxers settled in around the arena’s perimeter. I strategically planned my positioning and climbed over the edge to sit in an empty spot between a long line of guys. The three to my left were together, but the majority off to my right appeared to be solo. They each had their own agendas – one read, one talked on the phone, a few closed their eyes with their heads tilted longingly at the sun, while the rest stared blankly at nothing in particular – but all of them had one thing in common: they didn’t seem to notice me. None of them appeared to be tourists, so it’s safe to guess they had encountered other women in veils in New York. The shock value didn’t seem to affect them, and neither did the close proximity of a woman.

62

We journeyed back uptown to Hell’s Kitchen and I remained covered until we reached the steps of my apartment, at which point I passed my neighbor who was watering his window boxes. I realized the day’s anonymity was about to become overtly conspicuous and quickly slid the veil off my head, not wanting to offer any fodder for rumors or idle chatter within my building.

136

Anne Hollander argues that, historically, masculine dress has articulated the body, whereas feminine dress frequently visually confuses the body (Hollander 1994, 48).

Further, she states that a woman’s form is generally covered and thereby transformed into the image of the “Dressed Woman,” which changes her actual proportions and frequently conceals her body “to replace its plain facts with satisfying mythic and functional verities” (Hollander 1994, 47). Visible modesty, a characteristic she places at the center of female clothing’s original goals, is a central component of Islamic dress, and one I explored in the above field experiment. While I felt invisible and overly modest in my veil, that is not a uniform response to wearing it – nor is its meaning and significance universal. The veil is a garment that is frequently assumed to be a consequence of social and political oppression and a symbol of imposed modesty, leaving little room for individuality and expression, let alone rebellion. For me, the veil served as a tool for disempowerment, as it rendered me invisible and covered me to the extent that I felt stripped of my social potency. However, while it had this impact on me, this affect is not inherent in the garment, but rather a product of its combination with my own cultural positionality and preferred state of public appearance. Narin, a professional woman who identifies herself as Muslim, dispelled some Western myths around veiling in our conversation. For her, wearing a veil is optional, but not something she actively adapts, as to wear one while living her secular lifestyle seems contradictory to her. She also recognizes the increasing “fashionability” of the veil, as it’s now available in many styles and colors (as witnessed by my vibrantly colored veil with decorative trim) and some women use the partial concealment imposed by the veil as a method of reshifting one’s 137

erogenous zones and highlighting facial features. “You look better wearing this than your regular hair,” Narin thought of one woman whose appearance was “improved” in the veil. Contrary to popular belief, it is not always merely oppressive, but sometimes a garment of desire. Still, some Muslim families actually reject it altogether, finding it offensive:

Sometimes, girls tell their parents that they want to wear a veil, and they don’t allow it. Because they feel like her life will be completely changed. Which, I can see happening…Some families don’t encourage it, [because] people’s perception of you and the way you are is going to be completely different. Which doesn’t make sense for me. My cousin [is] a religious guy. He got married to this girl and she wears it so that only her eyes are showing. And my family is pretty cool. None of us wear headscarves. My grandmother went nuts [when she saw my cousin’s wife]. She said it doesn’t make sense, because, to her, it was obscene that she would hide her face and just show her eyes. She simply assumed and just blacklisted her. She didn’t treat her nice, and you would assume that a person who would wear that is a pretty devoted person. We were like “Grandma, this doesn’t make sense. Would you rather have someone who’s always showing skin or someone who is this devoted?” [My grandmother] never [wore one]. I think it’s a prestige thing. (Narin 112 )

Whether used to conceal or highlight,

the veil remains one of the most

controversial and misunderstood

garments. On April 25, 2007, the New

York Post ran this front page story

(pictured at left), on the Iranian

crackdown on women who refused to

adhere to the Islamic dress code.

Using pejorative terms like

63

112 Narin, interview by author, June 9, 2007. 138

“medieval,” “barbaric,” and “dresstapo,” the Post reported that violators of the law would now risk up to five years’ exile from Tehran. When the story was published, a reported

3,200 women had been warned and 200 had been arrested in Tehran – most of whom were released after signing papers in which they pledged not to appear “inadequately dressed in public” – a classification that extended not only to those who left their homes with bare heads, but also those who showed too much hair or wore bright, decorative headscarves. The Iranian prosecutor, Saeed Mortazavi, is quoted as saying, “Those women who appear in public like decadent models endanger the security and dignity of young men” (Dareini 2007), a statement that was countered by a bank clerk, Sadeq

Rowshani, who said, “The problem of our country is unemployment, the rapid increase in the number of crimes and murders, not women’s dress” (Dareini 2007).

As exemplified by the Post’s article, the Western media’s obsession with veiling has enraged many Muslim women in recent years – an obsession that, as Sadeq pointed out to fellow Iranians and Muslims, ignores the more pertinent issues of war, disease, hunger, and poverty which affect many of the countries where women either choose to adapt the veil or, as witnessed in the above story in Iran, where it is imposed upon them by the government. Whether the veil is a preference or an act of oppression varies from person to person, country to country, differing amongst local customs. The Islam of the

Koran does not necessarily promote misogyny, nor does the veil, the garment itself, inherently repress or deny power. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, in her memoir, Infidel , describes the

sensation she felt as a child as she experimented with veiling: “It had a thrill to it, a

sensuous feeling. It made me feel powerful: underneath this screen lay a previously 139

unsuspected, but potentially lethal femininity. I was unique…It made me feel like an

individual. It sent out a message of superiority” (Ali 2007, 85). Ali’s experience

demonstrates that it is the context in and technique through which the veil is applied

and/or imposed that dictates its capacity for facilitating or hindering one’s social might.

Faith and fashion intersect daily for Muslim woman, particularly those living outside of Islamic countries, as they must constantly reconcile their social and religious identities in an attempt to appear both modern and devout. Modesty plays a key role, as they attempt to conceal curves while projecting an “attractive but not provocative, demure but not dour” appearance (La Ferla 2007).

64

65

Religious overtones took front stage on the runways at the

Paris fashion shows in February of 2006, where many of the models

were shrouded, masked, or “veiled” in some way (see photos above

and below right). To some non-fashion industry scholars, the designs

were treated as signs of misogyny. In response to the shows,

Suzanna Walters, the chair of the gender studies department at

Indiana University, said that “when the masking of women is turned 140

into fashion, there is the risk of turning violence against women into nothing more than a matter of style” (Rosenbloom 2006). Anne Hollander responded to the event as well, adding that “the masking of the female heads strikes me as part of a general new anti- feminism” (Rosenbloom 2006). The designers, however, didn’t seem to share the scholars’ seriousness with regard to the issues provoked by the models’ display, and seemed more concerned with shock-value and perhaps even practicality: Designer Jun

Takahashi commented that it was “kind of a joke” as he “didn’t want any distraction from the line” (Rosenbloom 2006). Despite any flippancy in the motivation behind veiling and masking the models, Takahashi’s attempt to emphasize the clothing – as opposed to the model’s faces – speaks to what Arjun Appadurai refers to as the “dual economy of appearance”: “A veil has one economy of operations: revealing and hiding…All visual phenomenon has this dual quality” (Arjun Appadurai 113 ). As one thing disappears from view, something else is revealed and highlighted, refocusing and complicating the individual’s appearance and how it is perceived. This refocusing is not random, but rather, to employ Goffman’s language, a powerful process of strategic image management that applies visual affectations to one’s personal front.

Thus, veiling and other visual concealments can also be acts of subversion that use various masks not only to hide, but to reveal another side of the individual. This masked self is not false, however, as that masked identity is a creative act and reveals

113 Arjun Appadurai, interview by author, New York, NY, March 4, 2008.

141

who they’re imagining themselves to be.114 Similarly, Goffman reminds us that the

“mask represents the conception we have formed of ourselves – the role we are striving

to live up to – this mask is our truer self, the self we would like to be” (Goffman 1959,

19). I examined the affects of this type of masking and its relationship to the duality of

visually concealing and revealing as I attempted to subvert my everyday gender and

sexuality in the following field experiment.

114 Inspired by my conversation with Betty Sue Flowers. (Betty Sue Flowers, phone interview by author, May 18, 2007.) 142

Field Experiment: Androgynous Date: September 26, 2007

66

The Man in Me

I’m a slight person, so when I decided to present myself as a boy for this project, I questioned my ability to convincingly pull it off. While size is not necessarily proportionate to the projection of masculinity, I was not certain a person of my stature, coupled with feminine features, could pass. Skeptical, I began piecing together an outfit that represented the way I felt my style would translate, were I a boy: camouflage cargo pants that sat low on my hips and were held up by a thick, black leather belt; a heavy-duty, plain, black t-shirt; a black leather arm cuff; clunky, black leather boots; a camouflage baseball cap; a silver chain that slung low off my belt- loops, and thick, black, square-framed glasses. The black t-shirt was material debris left behind by a (small) ex-boyfriend, and the belt chain was purchased specifically for this exercise, but the rest of the outfit is part of my regular closet, though not necessarily items I would normally wear simultaneously. I tucked my hair into a nylon skull cap, then placed the baseball cap over it, thereby hiding my hair, with the exception of a few whispies that crept out at the back. I don’t have a large chest, but it was nonetheless difficult to completely conceal. I started with a bandeau bra- top, worn lower than normal, to flatten myself. I layered a tight, spandex tank-top over the bandeau, and then further compressed the area with a very fitted sports bra. The heavy-duty t- shirt hung loosely and was not formfitting, so my chest was de-emphasized. I finished off the look with a toothpick: I almost always carry tea tree chewing sticks with me, and the toothpick- 143

hanging-out-of-the-mouth look seemed appropriately antithetical to all things feminine, so I adapted it as my go-to habit for the evening. The minute I began to suit-up, my anxieties started to diminish. I no longer exuded femininity: my curves were hidden, my shoulders slightly slouched, my weight shifting between my left and right hips, my hands tucked deep into my pockets. And yet, I still wasn’t convinced I looked like a boy. The glasses and cap helped to draw attention away from my facial features, but my overall size, in addition to my inability to completely hide the hair on my head or grow facial hair (or some kind of stubble), didn’t completely cancel out my actual sex. There was a significant transformation, however, and I decided the look was more aptly described as androgynous, as opposed to manly. I screamed neither man nor woman and yet was considerably more masculine than feminine. I realized I looked like more of a stereotypical butch lesbian than anything else. I stepped out my door and my gait and carriage shifted instantly. Slightly lower to the ground, knees bent a bit more with each step, shoulders rounded forward, I kept my head tilted downward, with one hand on my toothpick and the other in my pocket (primarily to hide my long, thin fingers and well-kept nails). The energy I received from passersby was decidedly different than my usual reception; it was now more distant, and I read their glances as cautiously inquisitive. Who was this person? Boy? Girl? Lesbian? Perhaps most importantly, I felt androgynous; I felt ambiguous. I was neither here nor there sexually. I hovered in a hazy realm where my perceived gender transformed me into a sexless creature. I didn’t feel like a man, but I no longer felt like a woman. We conducted the majority of the photo shoot in Chelsea, as that area provides a plethora of colorful store fronts and provocative backdrops with which to frame the photographs. In addition to the usual neighborhood delis and drug stores, 67 we wandered past sex shops, fetish shops, and gay bars marked with the rainbow flag. Men dominate the Chelsea streets, and I subsequently found myself feeling more male in my outfit as we walked up 8 th Avenue. We then descended to the West Village, another hot-spot for gay bars and novelty sex shops alike, yet one with a more mixed population commingling. The tone of the street was almost carnivalesque, as we happened upon a man wearing a cat on his head (and asking for money in exchange for the amusement he offered, simply by the sight of him), and a pair of twins, who not only dressed identically – down to the cell phone holder clipped in exactly the same place on their right hips and their matching “SORRY GIRLS, I 144

ONLY DATE MODELS” T-shirts – but who also spoke in unison. When I asked them their names, all I could make out was “Jay.” I never determined if they have different names.

68 69 We stopped into the Stonewall Inn, the famous site of the historic gay rights riots of 1969, to have a drink. It was sparsely populated with about a dozen men and two women who seemed more like musical theater groupies than lesbians. There were no seats at the bar, however, so it was difficult to mingle and I was unable to make contact with any of the patrons. After departing Stonewall at around 8:30, I said goodbye to Darren and branched off solo. I wanted to test what type of reception I’d receive from women, so I headed to Henrietta Hudson’s, a divey, no-frills lesbian bar in the West Village. When I approached, a large Hispanic man was guarding the door. He explained that there was a $7 cover charge because there was a DJ for Latin night. Reluctantly, I paid my money and took the drink ticket he offered me (good for a $2 rum cocktail during their happy hour – which ended an hour and a half prior to my arrival). I walked past the small, square bar and headed to the restroom that was marked with a unisex sign on the outside and which has no mirror on the inside. I exited the bathroom and found a small, unoccupied standing-room space at the bar. The cute, blonde, slightly stocky bartender immediately asked for my drink order. Her accent was heavy, and I later learned she was from Colombia. She wore her hair in a sleek bob, with 145

70 jeans and a white polo, and her raspy voice easily overpowered both the music and the patrons as she worked the bar and sipped whiskey. I ordered my usual drink-of-choice, a Tanqueray and soda with extra lime. Although I had no desire to consume alcohol, I figured it would be difficult to pass off a solo appearance in a bar without a cocktail. Her pour was around ¾ gin, ¼ soda. I cringed. There was a chair next to me with a Mets cap placed on the seat. I stared for a few moments at the TV screens that were broadcasting “Dancing with the Stars,” until the girl to the right of the chair removed the hat and motioned for me to sit down. “This is my friend’s, but she’s been outside for a while, so you should just sit down,” she said in a bubbly voice with a friendly smile. Her name was Raquel and she wore a red, black, and white printed spaghetti- strap dress with a long, full skirt and a black belt cinched at her waist. Her curvaceous shape was accentuated with a black, lacy slip which covered her cleavage, and her legs remained crossed, with one foot lifted, revealing her strappy 3-inch heels. She wore her long, kinky curls up in a high ponytail, which emphasized her black, heavily-lined eyes. “So, how long is your hair?” she inquired. I explained to her that I recently cut it, so it was only down to my chin. “Oh, I thought for sure you were gonna say you have hair down to here,” she said, pointing midway down my back with her hand. “No, I like to cut my hair a lot. I’m not very attached to it. I’d shave my head,” I replied. “Oh no! I freak out whenever anyone comes near me with a scissors,” she exclaimed, “but we have different styles – you’re more of a tomboy.” I agreed with her, not because it kept me in character, but because it felt honest. I did feel like more of a tomboy, despite the fact that I would normally dress as femininely as she was outfitted. I sat with my legs slightly apart, slouched forward toward the bar, occasionally leaning back with my hands in my pockets. I felt a bit shier than usual, as if the androgynous, tomboy Anna didn’t like to be the aggressor and preferred to be approached. “How old are you?” she probed. “28, I’ll be 29 this fall,” I replied, expecting her to say she was significantly younger than me. “Oh my god, I thought ‘This girl is young. She isn’t 146

more than 22,’” she replied in amazement. “How old are you?” I asked. “30,” she said, and went on to detail the depression she went into when she turned 29, but that by 30 she was loving life and indifferent to her age. Raquel’s friend returned, but she never asked for her seat back, nor was I introduced to her – which I found odd, considering the fact that she was quite obviously engaged in conversations with both of us. She mentioned that she preferred not to “date within the circle,” so perhaps this was her attempt at keeping me outside of the circle, and thereby within her potential dating pool. I sipped my drink in agony, trying desperately to look interested in it, but Raquel was onto me. “That hasn’t moved in the last fifteen minutes!” she said as she used a straw to measure how much I’d consumed. “Yeah, it’s pretty strong,” I admitted. “Have her make you another one,” she suggested matter-of-factly (she’d already gone through several incarnations of experimental cocktails offered to her by the bartender). “Naw, it’s fine,” I said, wanting to avoid the obligation I’d feel to finish the drink if the bartender made me a new one. “This girl is so cute,” she said repeatedly, in reference to me, to no one in particular. Over the next hour and a half, I talked at length with Raquel, during which time I learned that she’s a 30 year-old Puerto Rican lesbian from Brooklyn, who works as an administrator at the Children’s Aid Society. She said she doesn’t hang out at Henrietta Hudson’s all the time, but that she didn’t feel like going home after work that day, so she stopped by – and at 10:00, she was still there. “I like ladies, obviously,” she admitted, as she began to tell me how she recently spent her vacation at the Atlanta gay pride week and was terribly disappointed by the drama and the vibe she encountered. I conversed with her without either confirming my sexual orientation or lying to her about any details of my biography. We spoke openly, and I can only assume that her sustained interest in me and candid conversation was of a flirtatious nature. At one point, the bouncer popped in from outside and requested a pint glass of pineapple juice from the bartender. “You’re such a guy,” she said as she finished off yet another glass of whiskey. There were no other men present, except for one guy who appeared to be gay and out for a night with his lesbian friend. The crowd was almost entirely paired-off into butch/femme couples, with only one or two small groups who were exclusively femmes or butches and who seemed to be there to meet people. The Latin music pulsated all night, but it wasn’t until around 10:00 that the dancing started. Couples took to the floor and began to expertly dance salsa and meringue, with the butch women assuming the lead, and their feminine companions following. As I sat there, I thought about how comfortable I was in the bar. I began to imagine that if I suddenly found myself in a women-only world,, my gaze would be significantly altered. It is not so much that I would become attracted to them in a sexual sense, but rather that I would come to more fully appreciate and admire them aesthetically. It demonstrated that beauty is assigned and illuminated not only by the existence of certain attributes, but also by the absence of certain external elements within a given context: women who might normally get lost in the narrow preferences of the traditional male gaze, redefined attractiveness and commanded attention in that space. By around 10:30, both Raquel and I decided to call it a night. We walked out together, and I started to get a little nervous because I didn’t know if she thought that signaled that I wanted to go home with her. She stopped for a moment at the entrance to light a cigarette, then gave me a hug and a kiss on the check and said, “Get home safe, mi amor.” I bid her the same and caught a cab uptown. 147

While it was a new experience for me, playing with and inverting visually assigned gender expectations has been considered an act of rebellion since at least the

14 th century. Prior to that time, men’s and women’s clothing looked very similar, as it was arguably styled to unite rather than divide the sexes. As Anne Hollander points out, Joan of Arc dressed in men’s clothing and wore short hair in the 1420’s and early 1430’s, a time when men’s clothes were very sexually expressive, which 71 made her appearance in them all the more shocking (see the 15 th century miniature above

for an artistic interpretation of her appearance). “She seemed to be shamelessly

displaying the breadth and richness of her sexual fantasies, not simply clothing her

spiritual and political strength in its suitable armor. And in so doing, she clearly aroused

the sexual fantasies of others” (Hollander 1994, 45). She links the wearing of the

opposite sex’s clothing to a type of sexual pleasure that defies the sex-specific semiotics

intended to facilitate procreation. “Sartorial borrowings from the other sex, whether

individual or collective, suddenly display a modern kind of knowledge that sexuality is

fluid, unaccountable, and even uncomfortable, not fixed, simple and easy” (Hollander

1994, 40). Joan of Arc was burned at the stake, in part, because of her preference for

and loyalty to male dress. The transcript of her court interrogation reveals the central role

played by her cross-dressing in her conviction and death: “You have continually worn

man’s dress…you have also worn your hair short…with nothing left that could show you 148

to be a woman…you condemn yourself in being unwilling to wear the customary clothing of your sex,” to which Joan replies, “For nothing in the world will I swear not to arm myself and put on a man’s dress” (Feinberg 1996, 35). While this extreme scenario may not seem entirely probable in a 21 st century context, it is not altogether unfathomable. Hollander believes that the continued public excitement over transvestism demonstrates the persistent commitment to a separation in men’s and women’s clothing.

However, men’s and women’s fashions are now so similar, and there are so many crossovers, that women don’t necessarily look masculine when they wear traditionally male styles like short hair and tailored clothing. In Transgender Warriors (1996), Leslie

Feinberg takes this argument a step further: “It’s clear that during the second half of [the

20 th ] century, women finally took over the total male scheme of dress, modified it to suit themselves, and have handed it back to men charged with immense new possibilities”

(Feinberg 1996, 182). Women have subverted traditional male dress to the point that it is no longer merely a game of mimicry or impersonation, but rather a blurred ping-pong match of perpetual reappropriation.

The social and political profundity of Joan of Arc’s sartorial rebellion seems almost mythological, but Betty Sue Flowers, an expert on myth, speaks to the myth- making in which we all participate as we construct and present our own identities as myths:

For me, myth and story overlap. Ancient mythology has to do with the stories of the culture. But everyone lives in stories. We have stories about who we are and what is possible. We have a lot more freedom in relation to the stories we tell about who we are and what’s possible than we think we do. So that's what continues to fascinate me about myth and 149

story—the potential power in them. That's why we named the [Joseph] Campbell series The Power of Myth. (Betty Sue Flowers 115 )

Flowers believes we can commit to physically holding our stories differently, thereby channeling and projecting a variety of classical archetypes: “I think that if you have a story about yourself as a victim, your posture will begin to look ‘victimish.’ If you have a story of yourself as a rebel, there’s likely to be some unusual piercing or tattoos – you’re making a statement there” (Betty Sue Flowers116 ). Flowers’ commentary on myth speaks to the power of myth, but one may apply it to the potential power of fashion – a transformative power that allows the individual to transcend biographical circumstances via imagination.

Retailer Bob Pollack commented on the ironic self-positioning of Ralph Lauren within the fashion industry:

Here’s a guy who dreamt…and always worked at that dream…[Ralph] made a study of people, definitely [using] the film industry…and set in his mind a tone, his tone of what he thought was the imagery he wanted. He pictured himself – even though his background was totally different – being surrounded by polo [culture], [which] he thought was very, very cool. Not thinking for one moment, I don’t think, that he would fit into that [as a Jewish New Yorker]. He probably realized that he could never fit into it, but that’s what he saw in himself. (Bob Pollack 117 )

Lauren serves as an example of an individual whose authenticity – and ultimately, his industry domination and professional success – is defined by the actualization of his

115 Betty Sue Flowers, phone interview by author, May 18, 2007.

116 Betty Sue Flowers, phone interview by author, May 18, 2007.

117 Bob Pollack, interview by author, Nantucket, MA, August 30, 2007.

150

possible self, not his biography. In a world of possible selves, authenticity (and its social

potency) lives and flourishes in the mythic reality of a realized imagination.

Lynn Yaeger (pictured at left) exemplifies the notion

of embodying myth. Yaeger’s story is one of rebellion: 72 “There was always a part of me that wanted to have a

pierced eyebrow. Something to say to the world, ‘I don’t

cooperate with you. I’m not one of you. I’m different.

I’m out of this mainstream thing. Just look at me’” (Lynn

Yaeger 118 ). There are always outlets for expression and

rebellion, even in totalitarian regimes. Many of the

women who spoke with me expressed a sense of rebellion in the way they believed they

projected themselves through dress, as well as explanations of how/why they were able to

“get away with it.” Allison Aston described her anti-corporate style and why she feels

she can pull it off:

I kind of wear some funky things… But, you know, they excuse it as, ‘Oh, she’s the PR girl, that’s okay!’…[David Yurman] is very corporate and I tend to break the mold a little bit. You know, I don’t wear black every day, most everybody does. I do wear high heels, I wear my boots, I wear leggings. I do whatever I think is fashionable to me and whatever I think looks good on me. That definitely pushes the envelope around here, but I think in a positive way. Because I am more of a public figure, if you will, as long as it looks good, as long as it’s, not sophisticated, but put together and it works well, I don’t think people would have an issue. (Allison Aston 119 )

118 Lynn Yaeger, interview by author, New York, NY, May 10, 2007.

119 Allison Aston, interview by author, New York, NY, April 11, 2007.

151

Others, like non-traditional Upper Easer Side resident Madelyn Ewing, refuse to comply not because of any expressionistic instincts, but more as a refusal to commit to the level of maintenance and financial investment required within her social circle’s aesthetic.

I imagine [other women] don’t think I try hard enough. I really don’t care about it. They care so much… I’m not trying too hard, I don’t have the time to do it. I even buy my pants at K-Mart, which is probably not the place I should be buying them. I hate shopping, period…I like to shop in Kmart and Wal-Mart and thrift shops…I like to walk along Madison Avenue, I like to look at stuff, but I never ever go into those stores. I never buy anything there…A long time ago, I finally had to sit down and add up how much I was spending on clothes every year, and I was shocked…And I think that’s what really threw me over the edge. I said, “No more…Maybe I’m too harsh with these people, because I don’t think they really see themselves as being so frivolous. I have to say, I think it is a bit frivolous. I think there are a lot of other things they could be doing with their lives. And they’re not stupid women. But many haven’t ever really wanted to work that hard. And as long as they’re very pretty, they’re taken care of. If I had been more beautiful, maybe later in my life I would have discovered I needed to do more, but I think I just would have been as lazy as all of them. (Madelyn Ewing 120 )

Ewing’s rejection of these shopping and beauty maintenance regimens is an embracement of her entrepreneurial pursuits, as she doesn’t believe there is both time and money for both. Sometimes it is not an entire look so much as a small detail that signifies this pro- work rebellion against beauty standards. For Alex Chantecaille, manicured nails are her point of departure within her social set and a way of demonstrating that her energy is focused on her career, not nail polish maintenance.

I personally am not a nail polish girl…I had some on this morning and I just took it off today because, it’s just not me, it doesn’t feel like me. I think there’s something subversive in saying, “I refuse to maintain my nails and have on nail polish and look super-pulled together,” because…by saying, “I don’t have time to do that,” I’m looking more like a worker. And that, for me, is a priority, [rather] than looking like I have hours to spend at the manicurist a couple times a week to maintain that look. But then again, I’ll go get my hair colored every few weeks or whatever it takes to make sure that looks up-to-par because, for me, looking like a natural blonde is more important to my look than looking like I have perfectly manicured nails. (Alex Chantecaille 121 )

120 Madelyn Ewing, interview by author, New York, NY, June 18, 2007. 121 Alex Chantecaille, interview by author, New York, NY, April 19, 2007. 152

As demonstrated by her commitment to hair care, Chantecaille’s refusal to cultivate a polished appearance is not unconditional. Similarly, Aston and Ewing do not completely reject the aesthetic standards of their professional and social spheres. Their visual subversions are selectively applied, as they use their small but pointed rebellions to exercise a might that is infeasible merely through undisputed conformity. And while the women I interviewed may not affect the world on the same level of magnitude as Joan of

Arc, they, too, tell their stories through their appearance, creating a mythic legacy which will continue to communicate an ever-evolving story of the power of visual dissent.

Distinguished compliance is not a permanent state one may achieve, but rather an active process which requires constant management and persistent negotiation.

Visual correctness challenges even the most astute individuals, and strictly imposed uniforms and assistance from trained image management professionals does not guarantee social ease with one’s appearance. There are some individuals for whom visual correctness may never be achieved, but my argument is that that inability is more closely linked with a lack of confidence, creativity, and imagination than with economic status – an argument that has heretofore been largely ignored.

Submission to dress expectations and obedience to authority is rarely met without

some nod to rebellion – however small – and an outlet for sartorial subversion is sought

within even the most restrictive situations. My experiment with the veil felt

uncomfortably oppressive. However, were I to wear it in a culture where all other

women were comparably attired, such as Iran, I would be one of the women who seek out 153

elaborate, beautiful veils, or who strategically allow small tufts of hair to illicitly peek out from beneath the covering. In those contexts the garment is still a veil, but the forbidden nature of the exposed hair and fashionable fabrics transforms it simultaneously into an outlet for subversion and expression, via its status as a political tool for oppression.

Playing with gender via cross-dressing further inverts deeply ingrained social norms and, as witnessed by the case of Joan of Arc, has frequently been regarded as one of the most controversial and consequential rejections of “visual correctness.” Much is revealed through concealment.

My androgynous field experiment tested the limits of visual correctness, but it

also demonstrated fashion’s ability to transform an individual sense of identity and

inspire belief in one’s audience, based on dress. By reinventing my visual persona, I was

afforded the opportunity to essentially rewrite the rules of my social status. The

transformation of these visual details did not alter any biological reality or erase my

personal history, but it did affect my social perception, as well as my conceptualization of

myself in that social space. My possible self became my real self during that

engagement.

Just as the veil is not inherently, exclusively oppressive, a socially rebellious

appearance such as punk-inspired dress or a heavily tattooed or pierced body, is not

inherently liberating. Rewriting one’s story via bodily manipulation is a fluctuating

currency that is central to the establishment of one’s social capital, and the preservation

and projection of youthfulness plays a key role in this personal myth-making, a topic

which will be explored in the following chapter. 154

CHAPTER 6

COMMODIFIED FLESH: BEAUTY AND THE BODY IN THE REGIME OF FASHION

73

Survival of the Fittest: Ephemerality and Consumerism

The essence of fashion is change. (Young 1937, 206)

The body, like isolated garments, does not have a singular symbolic significance.

It is malleable and subject to cultural conditioning and the affects of biological evolution and ageing. One may attempt to conceal or manipulate these accumulated affects, and those tactics and their consequences are the subject of this chapter, in which I explore the extent to which we commodify our own flesh in exchange for ease in visual correctness.

The ephemerality of the body and the body’s role as social capital and as a valuable 155

currency for exchange are the overarching themes. This section focuses on what I refer to as the “survival of the fittest,” in which body maintenance and the preservation of youth are paramount to success. This leads to a discussion of the modern beauty imperative and an examination of the current makeover craze, which is fueled in large part by bodily techniques and plastic surgery, which are explored in the final section of this chapter. Nakedness is also reconsidered in the final section, not as an absence of clothing, but as a refrainment from affectation

Fashion writers disagree about the manner, rate, and impetus behind transformations in fashion, but there is one thing on which they all concur: fashion changes. One of the most significant influences on the conceptualization of fashion’s many incarnations was On the Origin of Species (1859 (1961)), by Charles Darwin.

Although Michel De Montaigne (1575) wrote centuries before Darwin penned On the

Origin of Species , he is perceived as using a precocious Darwinist approach in his

analysis of fashion. The notion of social Darwinism had a huge impact on fashion writers

after On the Origin of Species was published in the late 1800s, the first of which was

George Darwin, Charles Darwin’s son, who wrote on the interplay between dress and evolutionary theory. George Darwin (1872) looks at the development of dress as a parallel to the evolution of species, theorizing that only the functional and beneficial fashion elements survive, while the others disappear and fade away. It is, quite simply,

“survival of the fittest” applied to fashion.

Herbert Spencer (1902 (1924)) also understands fashion in Darwinian terms and is actually thought to have coined the phrase “survival of the fittest,” which is a phrase 156

that I feel most accurately complements the power of creatively imagined, actualized, visual affectation. Although Spencer’s work is read far less today, he serves as a significant influence upon major social theorists like Durkheim, Weber, Veblen, and

Simmel. Spencer believes that social life is governed by evolutionary laws. Similarly,

Thorstein Veblen subscribes to the same beliefs as Spencer and the other Social

Evolutionists of his time, as he understands social institutions to function in the same manner as biological species. The idea that the functioning of social institutions mirrors that of biological species supports my claim that fashion operates as a paradigm for human behavior, an idea that is further substantiated by Simmel: “Fashion is the imitation of a given example and satisfies the demand for social adaptation” (Simmel

1971, 296). This propensity toward imitation leads to differentiation within the race – a biological imperative. 122 Modern techniques have afforded humans the luxury of

speeding up this differentiation process, eliminating the need to wait for genetics to

impress itself upon future generations, while allowing individuals to engage in bodily

manipulation in an effort to affect immediate change in one’s visual persona and social

capital.

“As fashion spreads, it gradually goes to its doom” (Simmel 1971, 302). This is

the fate that awaits all trends within the fashion system: ultimate demise. “Fashion

includes a peculiar attraction of limitation, the attraction of a simultaneous beginning and

122 The theories on the evolution and cyclical changes of fashion are wide and varied. To name just a few who expand on these notions, James Laver (1937) and Agnes Brooke Young (1937) understand fashion cyclically, like Simmel, while others like Christian Garve (1792) see evolutions in design as a contribution to human perfection and an outlet for social progress. 157

end, the charm of novelty coupled to that of transitoriness” (Simmel 1971, 302). Simmel argues that fashion is more representative of the “now” than other cultural phenomena, as it gently tip-toes between the future and the past:

Life according to fashion consists of a balancing of destruction and upbuilding; its content acquires characteristics by destruction of an earlier form; it possesses a peculiar uniformity in which the satisfying of the love of destruction and of the demand for positive elements can no longer be separated from each other. (Simmel 1971, 306)

Fashion blends past incarnations of things “fashionable” with a vision of future trends.

The visual expressions that have reached the end of their current reign, however, fade with the knowledge that they will resurrect again, partnered with other images that come to consumer life once more through the evolution of time and the influence of a new context upon the viewer’s gaze. The capricious character of fashion does not diminish its significance, but rather makes it all the more desirable. “Fashion possesses this peculiar quality, that every individual type to a certain extent makes its appearance as though it intended to live forever” (Simmel 1971, 319). And in a sense, it does, through the cyclical enactment of its own mortality. The chance of a “second existence,” as implied by Simmel, is the promise of fashion – a testament to its profound possibilities – not as an article of clothing, but as a cyclical system of exchange in which one’s opportunities for personal rearticulation and visual acumen are a renewable resource.

158

I agree with and adapt Arjun Appadurai’s notion that we live in a regime of 74 fashion – a system of consumption. He

examines the ephemerality of consumption

through his notion of the aesthetic of the

ephemeral, which he places at the center of

modern consumption – a form of work which

links fantasy and nostalgia to one’s desire for

new commodities (Appadurai 1996, 82). “The

aesthetic of ephemerality becomes the

civilizing counterpart of flexible accumulation

and the work of the imagination is to link the

ephemerality of goods with the pleasure of the senses” (Appadurai 1996, 85). He suggests that, apropos Goffman, one may rethink “the presentation of self in everyday life” as the re-presentation of self. Bodily manipulation is one technique of reproduction that fosters a relationship between “wanting, remembering, being, and buying” (Appadurai 1996, 84). Modern outlets for the commoditization of the body are many: slavery, human trafficking (in a partial body sense, such as through the selling of organs), sexual trafficking (in which the whole body is exchanged), labor and outsourcing, and cloning. Plastic surgery or “nip and tuck,” as it is popularly referred, is also a method of body commodification:

The techniques of the body appropriate to this modern consumption regime involve…a variety of techniques…for body change that make the body of the consumer itself potentially ephemeral and manipulable; and a system of body-related fashion practices in which 159

impersonation (other genders, classes, roles, and occupations)…is the key to distinction. (Appadurai 1996, 84)

To borrow a phrase from my conversation with Appadurai, the body acts as a type of

“craft object,” where tattoos, plastic surgery, and even sexual transformation facilitate one’s distinction through ephemeral manipulation and impersonation.

We manipulate our appearances with the attention and diligent fervor of a paid employee eager to move up the corporate ranks. Our bodies represent our worth, and thus must be scrupulously managed. Berger and Luckman aptly express this sentiment:

“Closest to me is the zone of everyday life that is directly accessible to my bodily manipulation. This zone contains the world within my reach, the world in which I act so as to modify its reality, or the world in which I work” (Berger and Luckmann 1967, 22).

For Berger and Luckmann, man is both a producer and a product of reality and himself.

By extension, man is therefore also both a consumer and a consumed good – which is informed by other goods. Appadurai rethinks Marx’s fetishism of commodities and

suggests that it’s been replaced by production fetishism (“To the extent that various kinds

of free-trade zones have become the models for production at large…production has itself

become a fetish, obscuring not social relations as such but the relations of production”

(Appadurai 1996, 42)) and the fetishism of the consumer . With respect to the latter,

Appadurai is arguing that “the consumer has been transformed through commodity

flow…into a sign” (Appadurai 1996, 42). The manner in which we consume, display,

and interact with these goods is exalted to the point of reification, or “the apprehension of

human phenomena as if they were things, that is, in non-human or possibly suprahuman 160

terms” (Appadurai 1996, 89). 123 Humans have come to know one another through the

objects with which they associate, and they negotiate the relationships in both their

private and public lives using this consumer model. “The humans of the age of affluence

are surrounded not so much by other human beings…but by objects. Their daily dealings

are now not so much with their fellow men, but rather…with the reception and

manipulation of goods and messages” (Baudrillard 1998, 25). Our relationships and our

identities are manufactured objects of consumption. I believe consumption is the axis of

modern culture, a sentiment expressed by Baudrillard, who defines everyday life as the

locus of this consumption, in which one’s sense of reality, the visual performance of self,

and consumerism intermingle to the point of imperceptible differentiation. Baudrillard

recalls that throughout history there was an attempt to ignore the body in an effort to

obliterate one’s physical sense of being – to make it invisible. It is his argument that the

trend is now not only to make the body visible, but that it is the cultural focal point and

the means to salvation that is of particular interest to me. In this sense, consumption

saves through the visual correctness it facilitates.

The relationship between salvation and fashioning the body is similarly addressed

by Bauman. Through the evocation of Polish writer Andrzej Stasiuk, Bauman suggests

that the ability to remake the self is a modern form of salvation (Bauman 2007, 113),

through which the past may be annulled (Bauman 2007, 103). 124 An investment in one’s

123 The concept of “reificiation” will be further explained in the following chapter, “Embodied Branding.”

124 It is important to note that while some of the theorists I use, like Baudrillard and Bauman, write with an anti-fashion sentiment, I feel compelled to use excerpts from their writings, as they make an important 161

body raises one’s social capital, as one’s level of “social fitness” becomes more refined, as previous bodily incarnations are erased and, thus, made irrelevant The achievement of this social fitness is integrally linked with culturally established – and enforced – beauty norms, as discussed in the following section.

contribution to this topic. However, I feel their commentaries are incomplete, and it is my intention to use this dissertation to extend their arguments and build upon their perspectives, in an effort to revitalize their ideas and perpetuate their relevance within the sociological field, with particular respect to sociology that is conducted through the lens of fashion.

162

The Beauty Imperative: Making Myths a Reality

75

There are no ugly women, only lazy ones. (mantra of Helena Rubenstein)

It’s not the clothes you wear, it’s the body you make. (Ellie Uyttenbroek 125 )

Beauty is a social obligation, or as Baudrillard puts it, “an absolute, religious

imperative. (Baudrillard 1998, 132). While I do not agree with Baudrillard’s anti-fashion

sentiment, I feel his description of the message sent to consumers by the mass media and

the beauty industry is particularly poignant, if incomplete:

Invest [in the body] narcissistically ‘from the inside,’ not in any sense to get to know it in depth, but, by a wholly fetishistic and spectacular logic, to form it into a smoother, more perfect, more functional object for the outside world. This narcissistic relation – it is a

125 Ellie Uyttenbroek, interview by author, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, April 2, 2007.

163

managed narcissism…exploring the body like a deposit to be mined in order to extract from it the visible signs of happiness. (Baudrillard 1998, 131)

It is indeed a type of “managed narcissism” that has many superficial qualities, but it is also an outlet for understanding and communication, and as demonstrated in the previous chapter, this managed narcissism may involve a type of distinguished compliance that, while demonstrating conformity, also carves a powerful space of appearance.

76

164

77

Siegfried Kracauer, in The Mass Ornament (1963 (1995)) uses the Tiller Girls (the early

20 th century incarnation of The Radio City Music Hall Rockettes), as an example of this

type of managed narcissism, in which there is a prescribed conformity to an aesthetic

ideal for public consumption. As early as the 1920’s, Kracauer recognized the emerging

society of consumers and its concomitant habits and social dynamics. The Tiller

Girl/Rockette example speaks to the modern, broadly accepted physical ideal and

standard of beauty to which women are expected to conform – not as an outlet for the

expression of personal vitality, but as a demonstration that one is aesthetically, and

therefore socially, viable, as recognized by plastic surgery consultant, Wendy Lewis:

Caring after what you look like is a necessity…for self-esteem issues and the way the world treats you… It’s not only looking beautiful so much to me as it looks like you’re in the game. 165

Polished. Like you actually put some effort into it. Not a muumuu and grey roots. (Wendy Lewis 126 )

Lewis’s comments reflect her observations from years of experience in the plastic surgery industry. She has witnessed the consequences of choosing not to conform – of settling for “a muumuu and grey roots,” as she puts it – and recognizes the added value of inveseting in one’s beauty capital.

Betty Sue Flowers speaks to the central role of beauty in myth, citing the example of “Cinderella,” whose beauty is overlooked until she transforms herself for the ball via grooming and fashionable dress. She examines Anna Nicole Smith as a modern

“Cinderella” story: “Here she is, not allowed to be a Playboy bunny because she’s not built right, so she gets herself built right and uses the archetype of the woman using her body to capture a prince” (Betty Sue Flowers 127 ). Myth and history alike have linked beauty with virtue and ugliness with vice. To what extent does the desire for beauty actually come from internal narcissism and media pressure? Is it also a biologically- driven affinity? While I am not qualified to comment on the authority of the scientific studies conducted with regard to the relationship to beauty and biology, it is interesting to note the conversation that is occurring with regard to appearance within the scientific world: Dev Singh created a controversial index of women’s waist-to-hip ratio as an examination of the role of proportions in beauty ideals. By conducting studies in which participants could digitally adjust women’s bodies until they thought they looked “best,”

126 Wendy Lewis, phone interview by author, February 1, 2007.

127 Betty Sue Flowers, phone interview by author, May 18, 2007.

166

and by analyzing measurements of Miss America contestants and Playboy models over a

50-year time-span, he concluded that men’s beauty ideal for women remained constant

(with a desired female waist-to-hip ratio of around .7 for men in over 37 countries). This contradicts the notion that the beauty ideal has become one of overall thinness, as it emphasizes proportions over total weight. 128

Singh linked the desired waist-to-hip ratio with fertility, but he is not the only

academic to argue that the power of beauty stems from the primal desire for procreation

and the perpetuation of the species. Dr. Randy Thornhill of the University of New

Mexico was the first to apply a mating preference for

symmetry in scorpion flies to humans. Biological

symmetry is difficult and therefore an indication of

“good genes,” which simultaneously points to a

strong constitution and good health – all of which are

desirable and necessary for survival. Beauty has also

been linked to intelligence and success. 129 Dr. Daniel

Hamermesh explored average salaries for “beautiful”

128 For more on Singh’s waist-to-hip ratio study: Dev Singh, “Adaptive significance of female physical attractiveness: Role of waist-to-hip ratio,” Journal of Personality78 and Social Psychology 65 (1993): 293- 307.

129 For more on physical symmetry and intelligence: M. Prokosch, R. Yeo and G.F. Miller, “Intelligence tests with higher g-loadings show higher correlations with body symmetry: Evidence for a general fitness factor mediated by developmental stability,” Intelligence 33 (2005): 203-213. For more on financial success and beauty: G.A. Pfann et. al., “Business success and businesses' beauty capital,” Economics Letters 93(3) (December 2006): 201-207.

167

people and “ugly” people, calculating an “ugliness penalty” and “beauty premium” for various geographic locales. 130 According to Hamermesh, the gap between the ugliness penalty and the beauty reward is greatest in China. It is therefore not surprising that a

Chinese tabloid ran a reverse beauty competition, dubbed internationally as the “Miss

Ugly Contest” (although the semi-literal title was “Grey Girl,” the Chinese translation of

“Cinderella.”) The “winner,” 27-year-old Zhang Di (pictured previous page in front of her pre-makeover photo), was awarded 100,000 yuan or $16,000 worth of plastic surgery

(over 12 operations) to make her look more “Western.” “Miss Ugly”-style competitions are not limited to China, however, as the U.S. has enthusiastically embraced a makeover- mentality, featuring remakes of “everyday people” on daily talk shows and reality television “extreme makeover” competitions. One such example is the Fox network hit show, The Swan , in which women who are unhappy with their appearance are chosen to compete in a drastic makeover and culminating beauty pageant (a Cinderella ball, if you will), with $300,000 in cash and prizes and a $100,000 stint as the NutriSystem diet company’s spokeswoman up for grabs – along with the promise of enhanced self-esteem and a more fulfilling life. Wendy Lewis speaks to the affect these programs have on her industry:

Television makes it all look so easy…but that’s not reality and that’s created this whole subclass of patients that have entered this market, who, frankly, I don’t want as clients. It used to be that when The Swan was on on Monday nights, my assistant knew that on Tuesday you had to be very careful of consultations—anyone who comes in…[and says], “I’m here for an extreme makeover”…needs to be grilled… The Swan doesn’t have a redeeming feature! It was as if somebody had a bad dream and came up with this program. Because

130 Daniel S. Hamermesh, Xin Meng and Jensen Zhang, “Dress For Success – Does Primping Pay?” Land Economics 9, (2002): 361-373.

168

you couldn’t believe that someone, especially a woman, could actually devise something so incredibly tacky and tasteless…Makeover television has changed the industry…I think that our tolerance for imperfection is far lower than it used to be. (Wendy Lewis 131 )

These programs fuel the image industry and, as Lewis indicates from her experience, diminish the social tolerance for “imperfection” – a problematic word, but one that reflects a striving of not only visual correctness, but more desperately, for survival via successful appearance.

Each of the participants in these makeover shows essentially agrees to categorize herself as an “ugly duckling” and loser, and then allow a team of unknown people to transform her – while she is forbidden to look in the mirror for 12 weeks. Army Captain

DeLisa Stiles (pictured before and after her Swan makeover below) underwent a tummy- tuck, an eye-lift, a brow-lift, breast augmentation, teeth whitening, and more, and was still served divorce papers from her husband during her participation in the show

(although she reported that it was not a surprise, as their marriage had been rocky for years). DeLisa’s inability to save her marriage via these augmentations reinforces the argument that individual garments or isolated acts of bodily manipulation alone do not guarantee social success – there is no precise formula.

131 Wendy Lewis, phone interview by author, February 1, 2007. 169

79 80 Jennifer Pozner refers to reality TV as a type of “cinematic Schadenfreude,” where beauty myths run rampant: “Dangerous beauty myths are fundamental to the reality universe, where women are unworthy of love and happiness if they’re not stereotypical hot babes” (Pozner 2004). One contestant proclaimed that she thought she looked “really damn good,” a comment which the show’s creator, Nely Galan, scolded as lazy self-acceptance. Pozner argues that all of the self-transformation the women pursue is in an effort to facilitate their larger goals of finding love, security, and, ultimately, male validation. She references the popular ABC series, The Bachelor , in which a man presented as a Prince Charming-type modern male selects his dream woman: “After all the happily-ever-after buildup, every bachelor has dumped his ‘chosen girl’ shortly after the series wrapped production. That’s the thing about fairy tales…they’re not real ” 170

(Pozner 2004). And what of the “losers”? Only one of the women is proclaimed victorious in all of these shows, while the rest are told they are still not worthy.

However, while I don’t wish to endorse these programs, I am interested in an alternative, less wholeheartedly pessimistic view of their affects, as I believe there is another perspective. These shows demonstrative the transformative power of visual self presentation – via either dress or bodily manipulation – within a “regime of fashion,” to use Appadurai’s terminology, which facilitates identity creation through choices in dress and techniques of the body. Curator and dress historian Harold Koda acknowledges that there was a point where clothing “engaged the body differently” than it does today.

Garments like corsets reformed the natural lines of the body by constraining and amplifying the body’s form. Not since the shoulder pads of the 1980’s has an item of clothing reshaped the body with such widespread popularity. While the fashion industry continues to manufacture new body enhancing garments, like Butt For You padded underwear (see photos below), the trend has moved away from temporary, removable augmentations that might be read as “fake,” to more invasive, physical manipulation that attempts not merely to cover the body, but merge with it. It is the creation and projection of a strategically formulated self, with body sculpting serving as a literal reconstruction of one’s identity. The role of the body in this personal reconstruction and the modern techniques which facilitate one’s investment in the body as social capital are the subject of the following section. 171

81 82

Without Butt For You padded underwear With Butt For You padded underwear

172

Body Over Mind: Nip, Tuck, Embalm

Field Experiment: Nude Beach Date: June 23, 2007

83 Dressing Down

“A beach is more than a place to escape the heat. It is a laboratory for testing latitudes about what constitutes a presentable form, half-clad or else wearing only nature’s design.” (Trebay 2007)

Somehow, while focusing my attention on clothing, I forgot to contemplate the impact of a lack of clothing. What happens when you strip away not only one’s physical coverings, but also the primary social indicators of place, status, and biographical identity? If clothing matters, then what does its inverse indicate? The silent dialogue exchanged between clothed individuals is a constant flow of context-specific communication: Stilettos and a short skirt communicate with striking difference in a night club and an office. But what if the stilettos come off – as well as the skirt? On the first official summer Saturday of 2007, I decided it was time to do what every devoted New Yorker does: get out of town. There’s an unspoken, unofficial rule that the more you love the city, the more you understand the importance of leaving it – especially when the temperature rises in unison with the heady garbage funk. For the past ten years I’ve taken the Long Island Rail Road to Long Beach, more out of ignorance and habit than any genuine enthusiasm, so when a friend tipped me off to the little-known day-trip to Sandy Hook, I started packing. 173

Sandy Hook is a 2044-acre beach peninsula at the tip of the northern New Jersey shore. It’s also a national park, which is significant for two reasons: 1) you can bring alcohol, and 2) clothing is optional. My friend, Carrie, and I planned to meet at the 11:00 a.m. high-speed ferry on Wall Street. The ferry costs $32 round-trip, and the trip is a brief 30 minutes from Manhattan. $32 is not exorbitant for a day-trip, but it is around $10 more than the Long Island excursions to the beach, so it attracts a slightly older demographic (by “older” I mean late 20’s and 30- somethings, as opposed to NYU students). Upon arrival on the Hook, you can catch any one of several school buses that shuttle pasty Manhattanites between various beaches along the peninsula, one of which is Gunnison Beach, a.k.a. the nude beach. There wasn’t enough room on the first two buses, so we were the last people to catch a ride on the shuttle. Actually, there were three young guys who hopped on the bus with us, but once we told the bus driver we were heading to Gunnison, they quickly jumped off and decided to wait for the next one – at which point the extremely tan, extremely thin bus driver burst into laughter with the cackle of a dedicated smoker when she heard where we were headed. After only a few minutes’ ride, we were dropped at a lovely oasis of shrubbery, with a winding path that led to a bathroom/shower/snack facility that far exceeds anything I’ve ever seen on the Long Island beaches. (There are no garbage cans, as they ask you to take your trash home with you – an interesting tactic, but one that seems to work, as there wasn’t a speck of litter anywhere.) We headed down the wooden path to the edge of the sand, which was still a 5 minute walk from the water. Lifeguards manned the area on either side of a more densely populated section with advertisements that aimed to educate the unknowing: “Warning: Sunbathers may be nude.” That was clearly where we wanted to be, so we stepped across an invisible barrier that separated the clothed from the unclothed. While a few women wore the bottom half of their bathing suits, the majority of the sunbathers were entirely nude. It is somewhat counterintuitive that most nude beach-goers are not the young and the beautiful. Rather, it is a community comprised of three main groups: 1) old men, 2) couples, 3) gay men (obviously, the groups are not entirely mutually exclusive). Their only apparent similarity is that they all enjoy the freedom of a clothing-optional atmosphere. Beyond that, their biographies are irrelevant. Carrie and I settled topless in an area near the water that offered a perfect representation of the beach’s diversity: Directly above us, a 30-something couple (both in bathing suits), played in the sand with their (naked) little boy. Directly above them sat a 50- something, naturally pale couple with full-body burns that appeared ready to blister and peel at any moment. They sat in beach chairs with an umbrella perched above. The man wore nothing but a black cock ring, while the woman took her clothes on and off repeatedly throughout the day. Both were extremely heavy. The man provided on-going entertainment for our sunglasses- shielded voyeuristic gazes: Periodically, he took some red beads and strung them through the cock ring, attaching the beads to one of his nipples – which resulted in a genital “lifting” effect, which I can only assume was part of a quest for an “even” tan. At one point, later in the afternoon, the couple rolled around on their blanket and had some fun with baby oil, the man receiving a lengthy massage from the woman, until the woman sat back in her beach chair while the man used the blanket to (slightly) hide the service he was performing on her down below. To our left was a man, also heavy, who was tanned beyond the point of bronze, thanks in part to the affinity for baby oil he shared with the aforementioned couple. He would rise occasionally to walk around or cool off in the water, at which time we found it difficult not to stare at his striking genital adornment: a penis piercing and several silver studs pierced through his balls. Again, 174

the sunglasses were key. To our right was an extremely average looking man who shamelessly turned his chair directly toward us, barely masking the fact that he was much more interested in the view several feet in front of him than he was in the sun or surf. Yet, he was harmless and neither approached nor conversed with us during his stay.

84

The lack of clothing did not obliterate the opportunity to express individuality; it simply made it more difficult to ascertain personal affiliations with other socio-economic groups. In addition to creative piercings, tattoos were extremely popular. The more tattoos a person displayed, the more committed they seemed to the clothing-optional lifestyle, as it afforded them an opportunity to regularly flaunt their designs, wherever they were physically situated. Similarly, the depth of one’s tan served as a comparable barometer of personal clothing-optional involvement. Body shape was perhaps the most striking factor in distinguishing individual self- presentation. With no draping or cinching to accentuate and diminish, the naked body served as a singular representation of itself. Normally utilized as a palette for expression, it now emerged to the forefront as the main attraction. Toned, muscled physiques were not the norm. If anything, the bodies erred on the larger, flabbier, less-than-perfect side, without so much as a hint of self- consciousness. One of the wonders of clothing is its ability to seduce through covering – or rather, to arouse and tempt its viewing audience through what is concealed and only partially revealed, leaving the viewer to form a mental picture of the naked body from the shapes created and the limited areas of flesh unveiled by the clothing. When social rules change and nudity becomes the visual standard, the rules of attraction and sexual stimulation necessarily shift. Select adornments and accoutrements – thongs, tattoos, jewelry – ignite the allure and color the otherwise bland canvas of blanket nakedness. One woman explained that her husband brings a bag of clothes and accessories with them to the beach, as he likes her to change “outfits” throughout the day, just to keep things interesting. The elements that made me look twice had less to do with nudity than they did with how the sparse garments and accessories interplayed with the pervasive nudity: an elderly man hiked through the sand wearing nothing but socks, sneakers, and headphones that attached to his Discman, and several people swam and socialized 175

in lacey lingerie and men’s briefs – all of which ironically seemed more scandalous than the nudity itself. A few hours into our visually stimulating visit, we were passed by a nude man wearing a baseball cap and carrying/wearing Mardi Gras beads. “Hi, white girl,” he bellowed as he walked by with a friend. Carrie has red hair and fair skin, while I have a darker, more olive- toned complexion, so we assumed she was the intended object of his comment, which amused us. On his return down the beach, he plopped down in the sand next to us (without clothes or a towel to shield his crevices from the sand). Carrie was awarded a strand of silver heart-shaped beads – because she was so pale? The rationale was unclear. Our new friend, Roberto, informed us that we had already earned nude beach personas: Carrie was “Apple Pie,” and I was the tough/exotic/high-maintenance friend. His basis for these applied identities stemmed exclusively from his impression of us based on our manner of walking to our chosen beach spot, as well as our physical attributes. In Roberto’s very fertile imagination, I exuded bad-girl, while Carrie emanated wholesomeness. Roberto informed us that he was shy (a highly debatable claim), had a career of undisclosed specificity at the U.N., traveled to Italy frequently, was moving to Hoboken, and kept a journal of his days at the beach. Nearly every couple or solo sunbather that strolled past was greeted with some type of provocative shout-out from Roberto. “Where are your beads?” he asked one woman who clearly wasn’t sporting her generous gift. “The clothed beach is that way,” he yelled at an over-dressed group of guys, pointing them away from the nude area. “Tell them I’m shy,” he said to another couple who seemed at least vaguely familiar with the man we’d given a moniker of our own: Mr. Nude Beach Congeniality. He promised us more beads, margaritas (he brought battery-operated blenders to the beach), and lively conversation if we’d relocate further up the beach – to which he casually referred, with a wide sweep of his hand, as his “area.” We opted to stay put, but he returned shortly with more beads, nonetheless. Invitations to beach parties and cocktail parties in the city and offers of accommodations and rides to-and-from the beach followed. And yet, despite Roberto’s forward nature, he was neither creepy nor sexually inappropriate. He was part of the community where rules shifted and, strangely, it was less invasive to be approached by a man wearing nothing but a baseball cap than it was to have a man in a suit try to buy you a drink at a crowded bar. Perhaps he was attracted to us, but that was beside the point. His desire to bring us into the community overshadowed whatever fantasies he may have secretly harbored. It’s hard to conceal ill- intentions at a nude beach, as public nudity not only strips you of labels and tailored trends, but its inherent vulnerability breeds a stark brand of honesty. Roberto wasn’t angelic, but he didn’t seem to have anything to hide.

176

In my field experiment, I read the nude 85 beach-goers largely based on their relationship to

clothing – however sparse – rather than its absence.

Each garment or personal ornamentation served to

emphasize a particular bodily trait or to express a

facet of their personalities, much like such

accessories do to a clothed individual. However,

unlike in clothed environments, in the context of an

all-nude setting, these objects serve as highly

valuable clues to each person’s clothed-world

associations. Without these accessories, they were, quite literally, not only naked from a lack of clothing, but also stripped of their cultural and social significance. This perspective is supported by Anne Hollander, who argues that the notion of nakedness is culturally constructed through its relationship to clothing.

“Both the perception and the self-perception of nudity are dependent on a sense of clothing – and of clothing understood through the medium of a visual convention”

(Hollander 1975, xii-xiii). Zygmunt Bauman also considers a revised understanding of

“nakedness.” Using the work of Gunther Anders, Bauman describes the “naked” body in a consumer society not merely as a reconceptualization of a form lacking covering, but more specifically, as that which has not been reworked – “an insufficiently ‘reified’ body” (Bauman 2007, 60). In the consumer society, the body is something to be overcome and discarded. “The ‘raw’, unadorned, un-re-formed and unprocessed body is 177

something to be ashamed of: offensive to the eye, always leaving much to be desired, and above all a living testimony to a failure of duty, and perhaps to the ineptitude, ignorance, impotence and resourcelessness of the ‘self’” (Bauman 2007, 59-60). I believe this bodily reification is integrally tied to a commitment to change that is made imperative within a regime of fashion.

I argue that an emphasis on the visual demonstration of social class is now overshadowed by a culture that celebrates youth, marking a significant shift in social communication and, as discussed throughout this dissertation, inspiring radical twists in the process of fashioning of the body. Walter Benjamin very precociously predicted these cultural shifts. His Arcade Project , or Passagen-Werk , while never published,

includes notes and drafts of the major work he envisioned, which is analyzed and pieced

together by Susan Buck-Morss in The Dialectics of Seeing (1989). “The ideal for human

subjects (urged into rigorous conformity to fashion’s dictates) becomes the biological

rigor mortis of eternal youth” (Buck-Morss 1989, 99). The flawless beauty characteristic

of youth must now utilize the mechanical production process as its aid in the preservation

of this youthfulness. This new commodified society has particularly significant

implications for the role of woman, as she must maintain her beauty, her youth, to retain

social relevance. The body (specifically the female body) is central to this cycle of

commodified ephemerality.

This commodified ephemerality persists through extreme makeover shows, as

previously discussed, and books like How Not to Look Old (2008), which escalate beauty

beyond vanity, presenting it as a crucial survival tactic. Natasha Singer refers to this 178

tactic as treating “the aging of one’s exterior as a disease” in her article, “Nice Resume.

Have You Considered Botox?” (Singer 2008). Nowhere is the obsession with youth more pronounced than with the cult of plastic surgery. Gaspare Tagliacozzi of Bologna is regarded as the founder of modern plastic surgery (although it was practiced in India centuries earlier) and is credited with performing the first rhinoplasty, or nose job, in

1597. Beauty Junkies: Our $15 Billion Obsession with Cosmetic Surgery (2006) credits

Tagliacozzi with starting the idea that aesthetic improvement can improve your life. In

his book, De Cortorum Chirurgia per Insitionem (The Surgery of Defects by

Implantation), Tagliacozzi writes that the purpose of plastic surgery was “to restore,

repair, and make whole those parts of the face which nature has given but which fortune

has taken away, not so much that they might delight the eye but that they may buoy up

the spirits and help the mind of the afflicted” (Mead 2006) – unlikely motives in today’s

plastic surgery industry.

In the New Yorker article, “Proud Flesh,” Rebecca Mead questions the purpose of

cosmetic surgery today. Unlike in Tagliacozzi’s time, few people undergo rhinoplasty or

other procedures to correct features mutilated or lost in a duel. Mead points to extreme

makeover shows as an indication that “beauty is a commodity to be acquired by the many

rather than a cosmic gift mysteriously granted to the elect…The new idea offered by the

contemporary culture of cosmetic surgery is that it is the vessel itself that we must value,

rather than the soul or spirit that it contains” (Mead 2006, 90). Plastic surgery is linked

with the belief in human perfectibility, echoing Benjamin, as cosmetic surgery cannot be

reduced merely to aesthetic improvement, but rather an unwavering commitment to the 179

preservation of youth. Zygmunt Bauman further complicates the issue, referring to plastic surgery as a type of “skin trade” (Bauman 2007, 38) where flesh is commodified, renovated, and exchanged. He conceptualizes of it as part of the “disposal mentality”:

The world inhabited by consumers is perceived by its inhabitants as a huge container of spare parts…No longer is one supposed to settle for what one has or what one is, and make do with both, reconciling oneself to the absence of other options and trying, for lack of alternatives, to make the best use of what the fate has offered. If some part…loses its public allure or market value, it needs to be excised, pulled out and replaced by a ‘new and improved,’ or just fresher and not yet work out ‘spare part.’ (Bauman 2007, 102)

While Bauman speaks of these practices disparagingly, his conceptualization of our disposal mentality, when applied to the body, demonstrates the extent to which cosmetic surgery operates as an instrument for personal change (understood as maintenance or

“improvement”) and a perpetual reformulation of one’s tradable self via the plasticity of the body, further expanding the possibilities of fashioning the body and the opportunities for claiming a space of appearance.

The high influx of consumers into the cosmetic enhancement market may be due in part to media coverage and celebrity influence, as well as women in the workplace with financial independence and a social imperative to remain youthful. Wendy Lewis recognizes this competitive spirit in her clients: “If you run with a crowd that’s wearing stilettos, having Botox, going to get teeth whitening every couple of months, you’re going to start looking like something the cat dragged in very quickly, if your contemporaries are doing things and you’re not… You look around and everybody’s 25”

(Wendy Lewis 132 ). The main growth of the industry is in minimally invasive, non-

132 Wendy Lewis, phone interview by author, February 1, 2007. 180

surgical treatments and procedures like Botox (with a seven- to-one growth of non- surgical versus surgical procedures). “Botox and liposuction are now in the vernacular.

Botox is to beauty what Kleenex is to personal care. It’s not only a brand, it’s a symbol.

It’s a cultural symbol. I use the phrase the Botox Generation, and that generation starts at thirty” (Wendy Lewis 133 ). As relayed by Lewis’s professional experience, women are

gravitating toward cosmetic enhancement and surgical procedures at an increasingly

younger age, as the social demands to preserve not only one’s youth, but simultaneously,

one’s social significance, increase. Bauman comments on this shift is from drastic

affectation through clothing to remaking the body into a socially idealized vessel:

Plastic surgery is not about the removal of a blemish, or reaching an ideal shape denied by nature or fate, but about keeping up with fast-changing standards, retaining one’s market value and discarding an image that has outlived its utility or charm so that a new public image can be put in its place – in a package deal with (hopefully) a new identity and (this for sure) a new beginning. (Bauman 2007, 101)

Bauman’s statement highlights the evolution of bodily techniques like plastic surgery, from Tagliacozzi’s rhinoplasty to the current youth-obsessed frenzy. Physical imperfections are increasingly less acceptable, as “effortlessly airbrushed” becomes the visual norm not only for celebrities and fashion magazines, but for everyday self- promotion and personal marketing, as well.

But how much is enough? This is the controversial question within cosmetic enhancement. Too much plastic surgery may overly distorts the individual’s original appearance can make the person look grotesque. (Wendy Lewis refers to her Upper East

133 Wendy Lewis, phone interview by author, February 1, 2007.

181

Side clients who undergo an exorbitant number of procedures as the “Sloan Rangers.”)

Louise comments on her overly-enhanced friends:

We all have women friends who have had their faces done a number of times, who are losing their looks, but they don’t realize it. Who all look the same – regardless of what color hair they started with, they all have blonde hair. Or, the woman who, out of nowhere, has these funny kind of lips. Do they not realize that everybody notices that? Some of them were very, very pretty before they started to do it. As an older, middle-aged woman, I think that’s probably the biggest thing that you notice: that you have to make the choice at some point whether you want to keep your own face or not. And if you want to keep your own face, you have to not obsess over the fact that you’re going to start to look different…There’s a certain age where, all of a sudden, you look much younger with your own face. (Louise 134 )

Louise’s experience suggests that even a lifetime and trust fund’s worth of plastic surgery does not ensure that the individual will necessarily “look good,” which is reinforced by

Anne Hollander:

Ordinary people will apparently do a great deal to avoid seeing what they actually look like, claiming not to be able to stand it, prizing good looks but disprizing themselves for caring about them, desiring to look wonderful and yet avoiding the means of doing so, feeling drawn to mirrors but loudly despising them. Instead, they will lose weight and do their working out at the gyms, both of which may be good for the health and have high moral connotations, to say nothing of great social acceptance, but neither of which has any effect whatsoever on the style of movement and gesture, the customary walk, the customary facial expression, or on the way clothes are worn – that is, on real looks. (Hollander 1994, 190)

Social survival depends not so much on one’s social class, but rather on one’s ability to preserve and project youth – a process in which plastic surgery has come to play a central role. And while such procedures are not inexpensive and are certainly not an option for everyone, the “fittest” individuals within a regime of fashion are not only physically toned and buffed, but excel at a type of performative correctness and holistic bodily awareness that even the most sophisticated extreme makeover cannot guarantee. These gestures, expressions, and personal style are not exercised by the naked (in a clothes-less

134 Louise, interview by author, April 25, 2007. 182

sense) body, but rather, are articulated in concert with objects of consumption, without which one is deemed culturally naked. The chance of a second existence, a re- presentation of self that is different from or an evolution of one’s original status, is accessible via the creative imagination, as previously discussed, in conjunction with trends that currently facilitate a democratization of fashion. For, in a consumer society, one’s body is not only (re)produced and (re)presented as commodified flesh, it is also a branded entity that is packaged and traded in relationship to other commodities, as explored in the final chapter.

183

CHAPTER 7

EMBODIED BRANDING: REIFICATION AND IDENTITY IN A CONSUMER SOCIETY

86

“I Shop Therefore I Am”

Fashion is the favorite child of capitalism. (Sombart 1902 (Purdy 2004), 316)

One’s flesh is commodified via bodily techniques that manipulate the body in an effort to alter one’s visual self-presentation – or “re-presentation” – and thereby invest in one’s social capital. This social capital is not relegated exclusively to the visually

“correct” selection of specific garments or extensive bodily makeovers; it is also traded through one’s association with brands, and the veritable transformation into one’s own brand, through one’s consumer product affiliations – a fresh conceptualization of what I refer to as “embodied branding.” This idea of embodied branding is explored throughout this chapter, as it moves from a theoretical discussion of the relationship between fashion 184

and capitalism and self/object partnerships – an “I shop therefore I am” mentality – to an examination of how one’s brand affiliations may blur one’s sense of identity, and finally, how what I refer to as the “democratization of fashion” changes the rules of consumer engagement and, ultimately, one’s ability to negotiate a space of appearance.

The notion of property as something that relates to both inanimate things and extends to one’s body is a starting point for a discussion on the topic of fashioning the body, as situated within a consumer society. Karl Marx is the first voice on the topic.

Private property is both the cause and effect of alienated labor, according to Karl Marx, as the worker becomes separated from herself through the self-denying external process of labor. 135 Simmel also provides a

guiding voice, as he describes the body as

property, and one may understand the act of

adorning the body through consumed

objects as an exercise in self-alienation

through fashion.

Every property is an extension of personality; property is that which obeys our wills, that in which our egos express, and externally realize themselves. This expression occurs, earliest and most completely, in regard to our body, which thus is our first and most unconditional possession. In the adorned body, we possess more; if we have the adorned body at our disposal, we are masters over more 87 and nobler things so to speak. It is therefore deeply significant that bodily adornment

135 See Karl Marx, “Economic & Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844,” The Marx-Engels Reader , ed. Robert C. Tucker (1978). for a more in-depth description of alienated labor. 185

becomes private property above all: it expands the ego and enlarges the sphere around us which is filled with our personality and which consists in the pleasure and the attention of our environment. (Simmel 1908, (Purdy 2004) 84)

Ironically, individuals perpetuate this alienation in exchange for the promise of greater

self-actualization via consumption. In the culture of consumption, existence itself

becomes an act of reification, in which one conceives of her social world as constituted

by material things, requiring product-appropriation for self-validation. 136 The objects serve as mediator and sign, the unifying link amongst an otherwise anonymous, disparate public. The desire for distinction, class differentiation, and the projection of individual identity offered by one’s affiliation with commodities overrules the negative consequences of an object-driven society. Thus, the masses are locked into a culture of consumption where reified objects define reality, and humans act and purchase accordingly.

Pierre Bourdieu also guides the conversation, as the body and objects of consumption are integrally related for him, particularly with respect to the object selection process – or taste – and the application of the objects to the person. The literal embodiment of taste on the part of the consumer expresses “in countless ways a whole relation to the body, i.e., a way of treating it, caring for it, feeding it, maintaining it, which reveals the deepest dispositions of the habitus” (Bourdieu 1984, 190). Objects, and specifically one’s cultivation of an object/self partnership, simulate status and offer social mobility. It is Bourdieu’s argument that the distinction offered through objects of consumption extends beyond mere conspicuous consumption, to include how the

136 See Georg Lukács, History and Class Consciousness (1968), for more on the notion of reification. 186

individual is perceived in relation to the object, that supports my claim that one invests in one’s social capital via strategic object affiliation. Social status is not a tangible entity, like the objects that represent and even come to embody it. Rather, it is an enactment that must be ritualistically performed and perpetually demonstrated through one’s affiliation with culturally-determined objects of status. However, it is the illusion of one’s membership in a particular group and the particular representation of self that one displays that reinforces the power of appearance and its position as a significant cultural issue. Fashion serves as a tool for negotiating one’s social capital, as our visual self- presentation reveals less about the economic class of which we are a part, than it does the way we imagine ourselves – an imagination which may supersede reality in the public eye.

The illusory nature of this imagination-based identity is indicative of a cultural shift, recognized by Guy Debord (Debord 1994, 16), from a state of having to a state of appearing. Thus, it is now not simply enough to have; one must also appear with the objects of one’s consumption. This is not unlike Veblen’s notion of conspicuous consumption, in which the objects consumed are not featured for their utility, but rather for the pecuniary status they communicate to one’s social competitors. However, this modern incarnation of conspicuous consumption is increasingly complex and nuanced and requires a studied eye in consumer product-selection. “The naïve exhibitionism of

‘conspicuous consumption,’ which seeks distinction in the crude display of ill-mastered luxury, is nothing compared to the unique capacity of the pure gaze, a quasi-creative power which sets the aesthete apart from the common herd” (Bourdieu 1984, 31). One 187

cannot merely appear “fashionable” – it is lost, irrelevant, “for nothing,” if there is no skilled, conditioned audience with a honed gaze to cast upon the human/object partnership. This aesthetic sensibility is not something reserved for museums and high- art events, but rather is an integral component of one’s construction and demonstration of identity and belonging in everyday life. Hence, to know in public, one must observe, and to be known, one must consume.

Modern consumption has become a type of duty, a new incarnation of the Puritan described in Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1958), where man works on himself as if he were a business onto himself. The Puritan has transformed into the “consumerist man,” to use Baudrillard’s phrase, who no longer engages in work as an obligatory activity, but rather consumes out of a social obligation to enjoy and be happy; “he sees himself as an enjoyment and satisfaction business” (Baudrillard 1998,

80). This obligatory lifestyle facilitates endless consumption, as one must always keep up with the latest offerings, for fear of missing out on something new, better, and crucial to one’s signification of belonging. In Consuming Life (2007), Zygmunt Bauman also speaks of consumption as integral to contemporary life, reducing it to part of the metabolic cycle of ingesting, digesting, and excreting, making it a fixed part of existence.

He presents consumerism as:

a type of social arrangement that results from recycling mundane, permanent and so to speak ‘regime-neutral’ human wants, desires and longings into the principal propelling and operating force of society, a force that coordinates systemic reproduction, social integration, social stratification and the formation of human individuals, as well all playing a major role in the processes of individual and group self-identification and in the selection and pursuit of individual life policies. (Bauman 2007, 28)

188

Both Baudrillard and Bauman approach consumerism from a negative standpoint, and once again, I feel their critiques are incomplete, as they view consumerism as type of enslavement and fail to recognize or assign worth to the possibilities for personal empowerment that may be gained from consumerism’s concomitant “social restratification” (to use Bauman’s term). I read Bauman as an inadvertent contribution to the notion of possible selves, particularly with respect to how he describes one’s “serial rebirths” (Bauman 2007, 101) via consumption:

The main attraction of shopping life is the offer of plentiful new starts and resurrections (chances of being ‘born again’)…the making and remaking of self-identity with the help of market-supplied identity kits…The life strategy of a fully fledged and seasoned consumer is wrapped around visions of ‘new dawns.’ (Bauman 2007, 49)

This conceptualization of consumerism places humans and their objects of consumption at the center of socialization, as individuals perpetually select and merge with the consumer goods, thereby evolving (or maintaining) their own social position and appearance.

The etymological root of ‘fashion,’ facere , is also the root of the word ‘fetish.’ It

is therefore unsurprising that commodities (the objects through which fashion is

consumed) and fetishes merge into ideological complements. The belief that we can

understand ourselves through the objects that adorn us is derived from Marx’s notion of

the mystification of material life and his theory on the fetishism of commodities ,137 in

which goods are thought to have human, psychological qualities. These goods must be

possessed to be understood, thereby serving as an extension of one’s identity and a

137 See Karl Marx, “ Capital ,” The Marx-Engels Reader , ed. Robert C. Tucker (1978). for a more in-depth description of these terms and theories. 189

tangible representation of the self. This is reminiscent of Herbert Blumer’s symbolic interactionism, a process or act of becoming, in which meaning is derived through interaction and the objects involved in the exchange are infused with significance.

The meaning of objects for a person arises fundamentally out of the way they are defined to him by others with whom he interacts…Out of a process of mutual indications, common objects emerge – objects that have the same meaning for a given set of people and are seen in the same manner by them. (Blumer 1969, 11)

Symbols, such as clothes, act as mediators between attached meaning and interpretive

reaction. These visual tools shape one’s environment and inspire a type of symbol-based

creative communication that creates order, facilitates human organization, and

distinguishes individuals. If one is not properly attired, she is visibly inarticulate and ill-

received. One willingly, eagerly facilitates the perpetuation of Marx’s fetishism of

commodities with the hope of furthering one’s own social goals by exercising the power

to consume, in an effort to be visibly articulate. Bauman’s conceptualization of the task

of the consumer is most apt:

The task of the consumers therefore, and the principal motive prompting them to engage in incessant consumer activity, is the task of lifting themselves out of that grey and flat invisibility and insubstantiality, making themselves stand out from the mass of indistinguishable objects ‘floating with equal specific gravity,’ and so catching the eye of (blasé!) consumers. (Bauman 2007, 12) 138

In a consumer society, the challenge presented to individuals (and the opportunity, which

is largely ignored by Bauman) is one of distinction, of rising above the “grey and flat

invisibility,” and claiming a space of appearance, as one’s self – a body commodified –

138 This passage references Simmel’s The Metropolis and Mental Life , in which he states that homogenous, blasé people “float with equal specific gravity in the constantly moving stream of money” (Simmel 1971, 330).

190

links with inanimate objects, which are framed by sophisticated branding tactics, as discussed in the following section.

Blurred Identity: Becoming the Brand

Consumption involves more than form and design, as the name, the brand, the image, and the words hovering elusively around the object have the power to breed more desirability than the shape, functionality, and tangible elements of the visible object itself.

Recognizable brands have an attention-grabbing power that transcends form and requires studied acculturation for participation. This mental attention-grabbing process is strategically honed in an effort to win favor amongst consumers. Su Mathews is a senior design partner at Lippincott Mercer – a firm who’s thought to be a pioneer in branding and the originators of the term “corporate identity.” 139 Mathews works to create brand

identities that go beyond the two-dimensionality of a logo and extend into “how that

identity is lived across many channels,” in mediums from the Internet to the

environmental experience of the places associated with the brand. “We help companies

understand who they are, or who they want to be. We help some companies refresh,

reinvent and in some cases create something entirely new. We help create brands and

bring them to life in a market” (Su Mathews 140 ).

139 .” Lippincott consults on corporate branding and identity image issues for companies like McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, American Express, and Time Warner.

140 Su Matthews, interview by author, New York, NY, February 2, 2007.

191

One of the services offered by Lippincott is an “image audit.” Infiniti, the luxury

car company, is one Lippincott client that received this service in an effort to help them

reposition their brand. Mathews analyzed the various dress codes required of different

service advisors and looked at current apparel trends worn by the employees and the

messages conveyed through that apparel, in comparison to where they wanted to take the

brand – toward an image that invoked the words, “thoughtful, graceful strong, fresh, and

unexpected.” In an effort to transition the company’s image (via its employees’ apparel),

Lippincott developed material and color palettes that were evocative of those attributes

and images. “Softly coordinated smart textures or soft details” (i.e. brushed aluminum)

were aligned with the brand, with examples of soft shirt colors and coordinating

pants/ties/accessories offered, as well as examples of what was not complementary to the

brand image.

[We looked not only at how to] complement the [company’s] color palette, but also…at the materials in the office…[If] they’re all very slick, high-end brushed aluminum, then we’re going to say that [certain] kinds of ties are not going to work very well in that environment. It’s really the translation of brushed aluminum to a silk tie. (Su Mathews 141 )

Reconstructing a brand through its employees dress is not a new concept – especially in air travel. In 1965, Braniff airlines hired Emilio Pucci to give the airline a new image through the wardrobe of its flight attendants. Braniff was the first airline to attempt to brand its airline with a lifestyle – not simply a logo or color scheme. In recent years, several international airlines have teamed up with high-profile designers, in the hopes that hip employee stylings will boost the airline’s performance. Some airlines hope that

141 Su Matthews, interview by author, New York, NY, February 2, 2007 192

allying themselves with chic looks will differentiate them from their less-polished competitors. Others feel the new uniforms might lift employee morale and even ease post-Sept. 11 anxieties. Jet Blue and Song are two airlines that have followed the Braniff example of selling style, not just a service. “Our brand is about stylish choices,” says

Stacy Geagan, the director of pubic relations for Song (Corcoran 2003). Song, through their partnership with designers Kate and Andy Spade, has attempted to position itself as both luxurious and low-cost, suggests Cate Corcoran in an article for Slate. “‘Luxury’ in this case doesn’t refer to goods (or services) that are made of the finest, most expensive, or rarest materials. It merely means that there is an association in the consumer’s mind between the brand and the idea of style and fashion” (Corcoran 2003). She uses the

Song/Spade partnership as an example of bringing unintimidating fashion to the masses. 142

142 It is interesting to note that Braniff made its last journey in 1982, after 54 years of operation and nearly 20 years after it launched its wildly successful Pucci uniforms. Song launched in 2003 and introduced the Kate Spade uniforms in 2004, then folded and merged back into its parent-company, Delta, in 2006. It is safe to deduce that in both cases, the design of the uniforms alone had little to do with the ultimate, overall successes and failures of the airlines.

193

88

Emilio Pucci for Braniff, 1965 89 90

Kate Spade for Song, 2004

In addition to the affect this has on the consumer, this holistic branding process works to assimilate the employee’s sense of self into the brand and make them not only 194

feel comfortable in the environment, but at one with the brand. Several of the women

I spoke with expressed similar experiences with the way in which they are expected to identify with the brands they represent through the cultivation of their own image in relationship to the brands:

Brooke, a partner in “Trendy Jeans Company”:

[I] Always [wear the product to work]…And we actually have everyone else in the house wear the product…We’re in market week, so I’ve had all of the 91 different editors come in. And it’s funny because starting this week, I definitely try to put myself together in the morning because it’s almost like you’re performing. And you’re really trying to appeal to those editors. You want them to say, “I want to look like that, I want to dress like that...I want to be that girl.” (Brooke 143 )

Alex Chantecaille of Chantecaille Cosmetics (pictured at right):

[Chantecaille employees] tend to wear black and look pulled together. We do ask that they wear “Chantecaille” makeup—natural and pretty-looking…I’m on the road so, when I’m traveling and in the stores, I try to look pulled together, being that I’m a representation of the brand. I try to look young and natural looking in my makeup, but understated and chic… People look at you because you’re the brand’s rep, and in the family…When my mom and I go into stores together, [she’ll say], “Okay, brush out your93 hair, look pulled together, throw out that gum,” and it’s true, she’s right. It’s all those little things that people judge you on…And so, when I’m working on a more meet-and- greet [basis with] customers and doing a personal appearance with my sister or my mother, that’s about also playing into what you think the customer91 sometimes wants to see or expects or would be impressed by seeing. So, there I’ll wear a much more chic outfit. Nothing that intimidates, because I think then you’re not relatable anymore – but [rather, one] that inspires and they go, ‘Oh good, I’m glad she looks so nice’…The focus

143 Brooke, interview by author, New York, NY, April 9, 2007.

195

is on you…More and more I do socialize in Manhattan and have dinners and meet new people, [and] I think about it. When they say, “Oh yeah, I viewed some of your products,” I would want to make sure that they were pleasantly surprised or thought, “That’s a lovely girl” when connecting to my product. So you have to think about your image on that level with strangers. (Alex Chantecaille 144 )

Allison Aston of David Yurman (pictured at right):

I feel like my professional life and my personal life are very much intertwined just because of the nature of my job…I don’t just blow it off until the last minute and say, “Oh, what am I going to wear 92 tonight?” I definitely plan a little bit ahead. If it’s black tie, I have something long on. It’s appropriate. Yes, you are that representative, if you will, that example. (Allison Aston 145 )

Each of these women is cognizant not only of her personal identity, but also the necessity for that identity to mesh with and enhance their professionally affiliated brands: Brooke attempts to integrate herself into the lifestyle promoted by Trendy Jeans, prompting consumers to purchase with the desire to “be that girl”; Chantecaille’s familial ties to the

Chantecaille brand make her not only an employee, but a genetic, biological representation of the brand’s ethos; Aston’s social position as a high-profile socialite, combined with the public nature of her professional career as a fashion industry PR executive, leaves little room for any clear differentiation between the brand and her personal identity. The brand, one’s fashioned body, and the individual operate in a state

144 Alex Chantecaille, interview by author, New York, NY, April 19, 2007.

145 Allison Aston, interview by author, New York, NY, April 11, 2007.

196

of overlapping intimacy for all of these women, to the point that there is frequently a merging of the garment and the brand into her identity.

The relationship between these branded objects and one’s physical self has long been a topic for speculation. George Van Ness Dearborn believes clothing functions as a type of second skin, literally mediating between the individual and her environment (Dearborn

1918, 4), with the garments affecting the physical body and, consequently, one’s psyche.

Similarly, Rudolf Hermann Lotze (1887) conceptualizes of clothing as the reinforcement and psychological reminder of one’s very existence, an extension of the individual. I, too, conceptualize of bodily adornment and coverings as a type of second skin and an extension of one’s identity. Allison Aston comments on this process through which physical adornment is assimilated into her person:

I wear this [gold, Cartier Love] bracelet, and to me, this is sort of a second skin. I don’t even count it as a piece of jewelry. Let’s say I’m getting dressed for a black tie, and I’m wearing all silver, or I’m wearing a ring. It’s as though this isn’t even on. And to someone else, it may be, but the way I wear my accessories, it has nothing to do with that fact. It’s like it’s not even there. (Allison Aston 146 )

93

146 Allison Aston, interview by author, New York, NY, April 11, 2007. 197

The Cartier Love bracelet is not just a bracelet, however. It is a recognized symbol of an exclusive brand. Aston’s identification with it – as a type of “second skin” – fuses her identity with that of Cartier’s. The commodity becomes her and she becomes it.

Bauman argues that, in a society of consumers, one must turn into a commodity in order to become a member of that society, which involves “raising the status of consumers to that of sellable commodities” (Bauman 2007, 57) through “perpetually resuscitating, resurrecting and replenishing the capacities expected and required of a sellable commodity” (Bauman 2007, 12). The individual in a consumer society must be constructed, and therefore the membership gained via the commoditization of the self involves the buying and selling of, as well as the appearance with, the commodities which serve as “the tokens deployed in the construction of identity” (Bauman

2007, 15).

The construction of this identity is not limited to the visual, however, as the relationship between brands and one’s sense of identity incorporates other senses, as well. Singapore 94 Airlines is an example of a brand that not only attempts to sell a sense of style, but also sells a full-sensory experience – a lifestyle – not just a trip. The “Singapore Girls,” or flight attendants (pictured above), are impeccably- groomed Asian women, of roughly the same weight, who wear the same body-conscious 198

uniform and offer the same gentle demeanor; they even wear the same nail polish color and perfume fragrance – all in an effort to induce a sense of familiarity and nostalgia in the customers. Reinforcing this approach, Su Mathews, a branding expert, argues that full-sensory branding is the direction in which corporate identity construction is moving.

It used to be about just the color palette and logo and brochure, but we’ve been looking at a whole, what is referred to as “sensory branding.” What’s the sense of the company? What’s the sound? The mnemonic when you hear it on television, the ad? When you’re on hold, what’s the music? Or when you get on the airline, what’s the right band that should be playing, or soundtrack? (Su Mathews 147 )

As corporations embrace this full-sensory model in an attempt to attract and retain consumers, the consumer experience – and thus one’s conceptualization and projection of self in relationship to these brands – is also altered. In the New Yorker article, “The

Soundtrack of Your Life,” David Owen examines how Muzak, a brand usually associated with elevator music, engages in “audio architecture,” in which brands are matched up with sounds in an attempt to produce a type of “aural pheromone” that attracts and repels certain consumers. Alvin Collis, formerly of Muzak, describes the full-sensory brand/consumer experience: “I walked into a store and understood: This is just like a movie. The company has built a set, and they’ve hired actors and given them costumes and taught them their lines, and every day they open their doors and say, ‘Let’s put on a show.’ It was retail theater” (Owen 2006). Through such enveloping, full-sensory appeals, the consumer not only exchanges money for goods and services, but is also transported into a sort of out-of-body state, where she is given a surreal, futuristic

147 Su Matthews, interview by author, New York, NY, February 2, 2007. 199

glimpse of her commodity-altered

identity – occasionally complete with its

own musical score and distinct scent.

Brands also attempt to cast

consumers in the everyday cinema of

their lives by selling specific ideologies.

Fulla, the “Muslim Barbie,” is not only a

doll, but a brand with an extensive line

of products. Through products like Fulla 95 chewing gum and Fulla breakfast cereal, the brand connects with the consumer in a

manner that extends beyond the traditional role-playing and game of “pretend” associated

with dolls, as the girls are not only seen with the products, but actually physically engage

with them and even ingest them. The product’s website offers this description of its Fulla

line of products:

Fulla – the little girl that wears modest outfits, her top priorities are respect for herself and all around her and being kind to her friends and peers. We take pride promoting virtues to help girls be the very best today so they will grow up to be the women who make a difference tomorrow. (http://www.fulla.us/ )

Each Fulla doll comes dressed in a hijab or traditional Muslim head and body covering,

along with optional conservative, domestic attire. Each doll also comes with her own

prayer mat and accessories like Misbaha , Muslim prayer beads. In the case of products

like Fulla, it is the hope of manufacturers that life will imitate consumers goods, not vice

versa, as it preoccupies young girls with a product that instills a particular way of life and 200

ideology, with the optimism that they will “practice” and even glamorize the act of veiling, and eventually embrace it as not merely a brand, but a chosen lifestyle and identity. They will, quite literally, embody the brand.

If brand affiliation is central to visibility in a consumer society, who has access to these objects of desire? As explored in the following section, the opportunities for consumer engagement have evolved significantly in recent years, opening the door to mass participation in the fashion system, and consequently, dramatically shifting who has a claim to power.

201

The Democratization of Fashion

Field Experiment: Designer knock-offs Date: April 21, 2007

96 Back Alley Bags

The first truly summery day of the year produced a swell of traffic on the streets of Chinatown. The white-athletic-shoe crowd that paraded through the nearly identical retail stalls signaled “tourist”: They shopped in groups, stood idly on the sidewalk, and spoke at elevated decibel levels to companions both near and far, in awe of the abundantly affordable goods. The Canal Street “stores” are more accurately shallow indents off the street, wide enough to accommodate two people across and extending only a few yards in from the sidewalk. It is difficult to distinguish one outlet from the next, as expertly-crafted designer replicas of the season’s latest trends bombard the frenzied customers at every turn. Watches, sunglasses, and seemingly endless collections of pleather bags boasting luxury labels are crammed into each corner of the closely-guarded portals. To the novice designer rip-off consumer, it is an affordable Eden of normally cost-prohibitive items that, to the untrained eye, pass as “authentic.” I wandered with an intent-to-shop air, examining the offerings and asking obvious questions like “Is this really D&G? Is it real leather? Where is it made?” Most of the workers had limited English, but they were conversant enough with the shopping lingo to entertain my 202

questions. All but one admitted that they were fakes, made of faux-leather in either China or Korea. One particularly confident shop assistant insisted that the bags were in fact leather, crafted in Italy, and authentically designed (despite the fact that a “Vani” tag hung from many of the bags, at which the assistant simply shook her head in confusion when I attempted to ask what that label was and why it was hanging on a “real” Chloe bag). The majority of the shoppers are content with these offerings, eager to return home and boast of their $25 Christian Dior handbag and $10 Seiko watch. But the bags that mark themselves with self-naming labels on the street are fairly limited: D&G, Chloe, Christian Dior, and Jimmy Choo are the primary options. What about the impossible-to-distinguish fake Pradas that seemed so ubiquitous a few years back, I wondered? And where are the Louis Vuitton look-alikes that leave women studying discreetly on the subways, using other socio-economic indicators to reach their verdict: real or fake? It didn’t take long to notice the less-than-subtle hawkers in nondescript attire that roam Canal muttering “handbags, handbags,” “Gucci, Fendi, Prada,” as if at a carnival. The hawkers didn’t appear to be linked with any store on the strip, so I decided to investigate where their verbal advertisements led. “What kind of bags do you have?” I asked a man in a lime green, inside-out t-shirt and frosted jeans. He swiftly passed me off to a woman eating an ice cream cone, who led me half a block south of Canal, into a cell phone retail store (where there appeared to be “legitimate” customers in the store). At the back of the small space was a door that was otherwise imperceptible until opened. She unlocked the door and ushered me in, shutting the door behind us. I stood in an oversized closet with floor-to-ceiling handbags displayed on the walls. Coach, Balenciaga, Gucci, Fendi, and Prada labels masqueraded with skilled precision. “Which you like?” she insisted gruffly. “I don’t know…” I stalled, attempting to negotiate more time in the space. “Which is the most popular?” “This one, this one, this one,” she indicated without hesitation, casually slapping three Coach styles. “All new,” she assured me. “Are they real?” I asked. “No. All fake. You want real, go to Macy’s,” she informed me, without pretense. I told her I couldn’t decide and would come back in a few minutes with my friend, who was interested in buying a bag for his girlfriend (which I did, returning with my photographer, Darren, to gain him access to the hidden shop, in an effort to test our ability snap a photograph – which was immediately denied, as expected).

203

97

Further west on Canal, I walked past an NYPD officer of Asian-descent. He was leaning casually against a retail window, observing the scene with removed awareness. “Can I ask you a question,” I inquired. “Sure, what’s that?” he responded in good spirits with a thick Brooklyn accent. “Is it illegal to sell designer rip-offs?” “Yes it is,” he answered confidently. “Then why are you standing here while everyone is selling them around you?” I asked as sweetly and innocently as possible. “Oh…it’s just one of those things,” he replied with obvious disinterest in the topic. “You know, it’s like, for every one drug dealer that’s caught, there are a hundred that get away. These guys are shut down all the time, but they just sprout back up again.” “Ok…thanks,” I replied, a bit taken aback by his casual approach to the topic. As I walked away, two blonde tourists approached to ask if they could have their photograph taken with him; he was happy to accommodate. I drifted into yet another carbon-copy shop, where a Bangladeshi man was attending to the watches. “Are these all fake?” I asked, recognizing that his English was a bit stronger than some of the other shop assistants I’d encountered. “Yes, all fake,” he replied. “So what’s the difference between these watches and the real ones?” I pressed. Completely aware of the fact that I had no intention of buying a watch, he still took a moment to explain to me the process by which they take the mechanical parts of cheaper watches and insert them into designer-inspired faces that are manufactured in China. He insisted that it would be difficult to decipher between a real and a fake version of the watches if placed side-by-side. Every last detail is exact, down to the backs of the faces, which are engraved identically to the designer version, as well as the “leather” wrist bands, which have “Genuine Leather” imprinted on the inside of the band, falsely advertising the nature of the material. One is of higher functioning quality, he admitted, but he assured me that the fake was not a bad watch. He wore an Omega replica whose face had been slightly cracked by a customer and which therefore could no longer be sold. “People come from all over to buy these goods, and the Chinese economy is greatly hurting the American 204

dollar,” he lectured. I thanked him for his time and stepped away so he could refocus his attention on real customers. I wandered east again and approached another hawker who was not dissimilar from the first. “What kind of bags do you have?” I asked curiously. “What kind you like?” he answered in a curt, all-business tone. But instead of leading me to a back room, he pulled out a plastic- coated piece of paper with color images of Chanel, Louis Vuitton, and other exclusive handbag designers. “Oh,” I said, surprised by the paper representation. “I would need to see them before I buy one. Could you show them to me?” “Which one you like? I have it for you.” “Um…that one’s pretty,” I commented as I pointed to a pink, quilted Chanel. “How big is it?” “Two sizes. One big [he used his hand to indicate its approximate size], one small [again, he gestured its size].” “Oh, I’d really need to see it before I buy it,” I insisted. “You tell me which you want, I bring it to you.” “How are you any different from these other sellers on the street? Why do you keep yours hidden?” I probed, straying from the topic and delaying his attempt to close the deal. After much back and forth, I learned that the brands offered openly are for legal sale, while the hidden labels remain illegal, as a result of lawsuits from individual design houses. However, despite the more forbidden and dangerous nature of the illicit brands, they’re only slightly more expensive than the openly sold items ($40 for most hidden bags, as compared with $30 for the legal rip-offs – with at least $5 of bargaining room for both). I told him I just couldn’t decide and, clearly irritated by my indecision, he folded the pocket catalog and put it away, immediately scanning the crowd for other more serious potential buyers. I crossed to the north side of Canal and encountered yet another hawker. Curious to see how this one compared with the very different approaches of the last two, I decided to play the game one more time. “What kind of bags do you have,” I asked yet again, adapting that phrase as my unofficial opening line. Darren was still with me, and without so much as a word, the hawker motioned for us to follow him, walking briskly through the crowd, keeping a good ten paces ahead and looking back periodically to make sure we were still on track. We traveled over three blocks, just north of Canal. He led us into a darkened store labeled “Lilly’s Beauty Salon,” which advertised waxing, massage, and other salon-oriented services. He unlocked the glass door and entered, locking the door behind us. We moved quickly through the dirty, empty space, where a lone “receptionist” talked on the phone behind a counter to our right. We journeyed behind a curtain and into the back room, passing a beaten-up massage table on the way. Another locked door opened into an oversized closet that was almost identical to the first hidden room I’d entered. “Andy” (the name he gave me when I asked for one) was extremely anxious and ill-at- ease, fidgety and impatient, eager to make the sale immediately; he was quick to bargain with me. I stalled a few moments with the usual set of questions, but he was less willing to entertain my lackadaisical shopping than the first woman. I once again claimed indecision and promised to think about it, at which time he pressed harder, displeased with my noncommittal response to his efforts. I apologized again and thanked him, moving toward the door. He allowed us to pass to the outer area, but he guarded the final door, the key in his hand. He made one last effort to convince me to purchase something on the spot, but I casually insisted that I really must think it over. Completely annoyed, he opened the door, permitted us to exit, and disappeared.

The fashion industry itself, not only its styles, hinges on change, and the retail tide seems to be turning once more: Formerly, couture fashion houses issued designs that 205

were copied and filtered down to the masses, but in recent years, this trickle-down process has been turned upside down, with fashion influences coming from every which way, including bottom-up, from the street. I concur with Terry Agins’ argument that the old model of fashion is obsolete (Agins 1999). One may examine this increasingly complex shift in the dissemination of fashion using my encounter with the world of designer knock-offs in Chinatown. For something to be a “knock-off,” there must be an

“original” to which some type of social, cultural, and/or monetary value has been applied.

In “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” Walter Benjamin argues that “that which withers in the age of mechanical reproduction is the aura of the work of art” (Benjamin 1968, 221). For Benjamin, the knock-off necessarily lacks the “aura” and splendor of the original. Arjun Appadurai, however, reconsiders this argument in less extreme terms. In his reflection on Benjamin’s commentary on the consequences of reproduction, Appadurai argues that “copies, forgeries, and fakes, which have a long history, do not threaten the aura of the original but seek to partake of it” (Appadurai

1986, 45). I embrace Appadurai’s rearticulation and evolved application of Benjamin’s idea, and offer the knock-off designer handbags as a prime example of a reproduced item that attempts to steal from – or “partake in,” to use Appadurai’s language – the coveted allure of the original.

In her article for The Atlantic Monthly , “Carried Away,” Lynn Yaeger speaks to the particular prestige applied to the handbag within modern conspicuous consumption:

Handbags have nosed their way into a place once occupied almost exclusively by diamonds and fancy furs, functioning as badges of honor, announcements that you’ve arrived at a particular economic or social level, or at the very least, emblems of hopefulness, yearning, 206

and optimism – I have the same bag as a movie star! I am someone to be reckoned with! – that can be brandished for all the world to see. (Yaeger 2007)

Alternatively, as a subject (and not a writer), Yaeger admits to carrying a fake bag only once, but that it “didn’t really work for her.” Why? For Yaeger, the aura of the original to which Benjamin referred still rings true:

I get really seduced by the fashion system. To have the bag, to have the money to have the label. You’re one of the cool girls with the label. I was like, “This is a plastic bag.” It wasn’t worth $1000. The fake one looks just as good…I know it looks like a plastic bag with no lettering or anything on it. Trust me, it has a mystique, it has an aura. You want to pay $1500, you just do. And then there were all those other people who said, “Oh, I love that aura, but I don’t have $1500. I only have $15.” So, I thought it was wonderful that this aura can be purchased. (Lynn Yaeger 148 )

She confesses that she cannot usually tell if someone is carrying a fake. Instead of focusing on the details of the bag (which are frequently quite convincing), she examines everything else about the person. “I have to say, ‘Well, it’s a Puerto Rican schoolgirl and she’s on the subway. Maybe her bag is fake.’ Because she’s so young, she doesn’t look like she has a lot of money.” But, she qualifies this statement: “It’s impossible to know somebody’s social class. The signals are much more subtle than they were a hundred years ago” (Lynn Yaeger 149 ). According to Harold Koda, there has been a reduction in the implementation of traditional, haute couture techniques in recent years. This widespread shift in quality contributes to consumer confusion and creates a space for more democratic participation in the fashion system, as it becomes increasingly more difficult to discern brand authenticity.

148 Lynn Yaeger, interview by author, New York, NY, May 10, 2007.

149 Lynn Yaeger, interview by author, New York, NY, May 10, 2007.

207

And what of Yaeger herself? She hardly fits the visual stereotype of the Upper

East Side designer collectors. “This may be more of an illusion on my part, but if I was going to interview someone, I look like I’m crazy, but I have this sort of expensive handbag so it says, ‘Hey, no, look. I’m the kind of person that can spend this money on a handbag. You should talk to me’” (Lynn Yaeger 150 ). A type of image management,

Yaeger’s alliance with an established brand signifies to viewers that she is not only a

quirky flea-market doll with bee-stung lips, but also a sophisticated and economically

capable consumer, and by extension, a sophisticated and capable social being. This

desire to obtain and exhibit a piece of the designer aura is a trend particularly popular

amongst young people who want to buy a single designer bag or other signature item that

flashes status and may, perhaps, force viewers to question the rest of the visual self-

presentation. This is paralleled by the growing phenomenon whereby otherwise widely

inaccessible designers offer a piece of themselves to the masses, by selling their designs

for significantly less through partnerships with discounted retailers like H&M.

98

150 Lynn Yaeger, interview by author, New York, NY, May 10, 2007.

208

H&M, however, is not the first to mix high-end designers with low-end prices. In 1981,

Alexander Julian launched the Colours collection, an affordable menswear collection that offered clothing at price-points well-below the norm for distinguished designers.

I was ridiculed by my colleagues who are now in H&M and Target…I found out that there’s this thing that I thought was a beast, called mass production, that was really pretty cool…to make good design affordable. So I used the [Colours] collection as a test drive to get different versions of this stuff. I found out that an Aero shirt company could buy the exact same fabric for shirts that I was buying for my couture line for less than half the price because they were buying millions and millions and millions of yards and I was buying hundreds, and it was almost the same. If you made it in quantity in a factory with 18 stitches per inch instead of 22 per inch and with fake pearl buttons as opposed to real pearl buttons, you could sell it for less than half the price. That was very cool. I could touch a lot of people. (Alexander Julian 151 )

Since the Colours line launched in the early ’80, stores like H&M, Zara, and even Target and Wal-Mart, have begun to sell more than cheap body coverings – they’re now marketing affordable luxury. In 2006, Wal-Mart staged a fashion show in Times Square

(see photo on page 212 of this dissertation). “What a Wal-Mart show in Times Square signals is the democratization of fashion,” argued Karen Stuckey, a senior vice president of Wal-Mart. “Fashion is not just for a chosen few who have front-row seats in some elite tent somewhere” (Trebay 2006). For some, a Wal-Mart fashion show in Times

Square or an Isaac Mizrahi design in H&M does signal “the end of fashion,” to borrow

Agins’ phrase, but for many, it marks the beginning of their participation in an industry that was previously regarded as exclusionary and inaccessible.

151 Alexander Julian, interview by author, New York, NY, June 21, 2007. 209

99 100

(above, Isaac Mizhari for Target; below, Madonna for H&M) 101

210

102

(above, a Wal-Mart fashion show in Times Square)

If consumption is a defining social imperative in a regime of fashion, then individuals will continue to discover new outlets for meaningful object affiliation – and subsequently, identity construction – as they play the role of consumer in their everyday lives. The significance of this performance is not located in the “aura” of the original biographical details of the individual, but in the self-selected, personalized story created through the presentation of these given circumstances, in relationship to one’s strategic adornment and brand affiliation. And while some may argue that this type of consumer- driven, branded identity is merely a gross, capitalistic feast that births generic homogenization, that glib perspective is neither thoughtfully complete nor particularly compelling. The infinitely varied articulation of selves afforded by this consumer alliance need not uniformly transform the individual into a corporate brand, as it presents 211

an unprecedented opportunity to subvert the hegemony by powerfully reincarnating each person into one’s own brand.

212

Part III

Conclusion

213

CHAPTER 8

FASHIONING POSSIBILITY

103

Beneath the dream of fame, another dream, a dream of no longer dissolving and staying dissolved in the gray, faceless and insipid mass of commodities, a dream of turning into a notable, noticed and coveted commodity, a talked-about commodity, a commodity standing out from the mass of commodities, a commodity impossible to overlook, to deride, to be dismissed, in a society of consumers, turning into a desirable and desired commodity is the stuff of which dreams, and fairy tales, are made. (Bauman 2007, 13)

The body you dream is your own. (Baudrillard 1998, 194)

Fashion is ripe with potential. As earlier explored, the etymological root of

“fashion,” facere , means “to make or do.” Thus, the trying on of selves – a fashioning of

possibilities – is a creative act, not a mere consequence of birth. Reality, belief, and

illusion intersect on the stage of the modern metropolitan street, a masked parade of

possible selves: In this regime of fashion, authenticity is irrelevant, visibility is 214

paramount, and imagined images made materially consumable are the substance of reality and the means to social power. In a consumer society, “we cannot escape fashion”

(Baudrillard 2004, 98), as it permeates all facets of the social world: our individual affinities and professional affiliations, the technology that mediates our vision of others and ourselves, and the landscape of our commodified bodies and branded identities. In each case, the body must be strategically fashioned in an effort to appear as not just another commodity incarnate with an impending shelf-life, but as an object of desire that claims a space to be seen and heard.

This dissertation has attempted to serve as a contribution to the field of visual sociology, as it’s essayed to address how fashion operates as a visually articulated social system that facilitates the negotiation of power. By exploring the various facets of one’s visual self-presentation, I have argued and demonstrated that one’s ability to claim a space of appearance within the public realm is no longer linked exclusively to one’s economic and social status, nor is one limited to the reality of biographical circumstances, but rather, this power stems from the exploration and articulation of one’s possible selves, through a commitment to both imaginative change and youthful self- preservation. 215

The field experiments demonstrated the extent to which seeing and being seen is not absolute on the urban street, as one is constantly understood in relationship to layered mediation. Technological advancements in new media offer a type of electronic mediation that creates more outlets for appearance and has the power to artificially preserve one’s appearance at any moment, blurring the front/backstage divide, as well as any distinction between one’s “authentic” self and one’s imagined self. However, this new media also offers the opportunity for a perpetual rebirth which is open to everyone – not just the privileged – and the accessibility of these potential selves reframes the

question of authenticity and disrupts the

traditional appropriation of power. The

field experiments also demonstrated the

extent to which variations in fashioning

the body can drastically enhance or limit

one’s ability to acquire social capital.

Again, this ability stemmed not from my

actual economic or social situation, but

from my ability to convincingly appear

and project my imagined persona. This

self-fashioning does more than affect

individual social status, however, as the 104 216

way in which we play out our roles on the public stage affects convention and, ultimately, the variations in self-fashioning operate as a social power that changes the larger social order.

I argued that there isn’t a single successful look, and youthful confidence can overshadow sartorial flubs, like excessive sexiness. Outside assistance from image professionals can build social capital, but many consultants misunderstand that visual correctness is an active, holistic operation, not a neat formula. I support radical visual articulation, but I acknowledge that a socially rebellious appearance can have significant consequences that may backfire and silence one’s quest for expression, and therefore it must be astutely managed. While personal distinction is central to one’s ability to carve a space of appearance, a demonstration of group affiliation is equally key, hence my case for distinguished compliance as a remedy for a life of “living in the cracks.”

An examination of bodily techniques like plastic surgery and other forms of

physical alteration exemplify the application of the imagination into a social practice of

transformation. In the regime of fashion, individuals capable of re-imagining their

identities are offered the chance of a second existence if they choose not to remain

culturally naked and bereft of visual affectation, as one’s commodified flesh is a currency

that translates into social capital in a consumer society. With consumption as the

cornerstone of the modern democratic institution, the individual symbolizes her personal

identity, as well as her social relevance, through her consumer habitus. Each purchase is

a new opportunity for redemption through appearance, but as with all acts of salvation, a

socially powerful persona is neither free nor easy. Thus, the metropolis’s citizen-actors 217

vie for visibility on the consumer stage, parading their wares as an act of social security and a visual statement of potent distinction. As the democratization of fashion spreads, brands become less exclusive and authenticity is made immaterial, allowing more individuals to exercise social virility. While I recognize the dangers of a consumer society, I argue that it also presents an unprecedented opportunity for individualized expression and customization that does more than enslave individuals: It facilitates the embodiment of an infinite assortment of personalized brands that not only express reality, but also animate possibility.

So where is the power in appearance? It is not inherent in the heels or guaranteed

with every facelift. It does not always wear a suit or hide under a veil, and it has been

known to leave the house without makeup. As Hannah Arendt argues, power is rooted in

potential, not immutability. The power of fashion is situated in the possibilities and

alternate realities – plucked from fairy tales and street blogs alike – which are

repositioned within the visible context of our lives – where impersonation is the key to

distinction and identities are manufactured, consumable goods; where raw, unadorned

“nakedness” is deemed socially inept and visually inarticulate; where the physical

embodiment of fashion’s ephemerality serves as a renewable resource for continued

relevance; where one’s alignment with brands indicates taste and sophistication, while the

advent of affordable luxury turns the entire system of conspicuous consumption on its

head. Each costume change may not start a revolution, but its burgeoning potentiality is

palpable – and powerful.

218

105

219

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agins, Teri. The End of Fashion. New York: HarperCollins, 1999. Akbari, Anna. “Rebellious Compliance: Living in the Cracks of Corporate Dress Codes.” MA thesis, New School for Social Research, 2004. Ali, Ayaan Hirsi. Infidel . New York: Free Press, 2007. Alva, Marilyn. “Color Me Verizon Red, T-Mobile Pink And….” Fox News , December 22, 2006. Alvarez, Lizette. “Speaking Chic to Power.” New York Times , January 18, 2007. Andersen, Kurt. “Celebrity Death Watch.” New York Magazine , April 3, 2006. Appadurai, Arjun, ed. The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Appadurai, Arjun. Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization, Public Worlds, Vol. 1 . Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press, 1996. Arendt, Hannah. The Human Condition . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1958. Arnold, Rebecca. Fashion, Desire and Anxiety . New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2001. Arthur, Linda B., ed. Religion, Dress and the Body . Oxford: Berg, 1999. Arthur, Linda B., ed. Undressing Religion: Commitment and Conversion from a Cross- Cultural Perspective . Oxford: Berg, 2000. Barnard, Malcolm. Fashion as Communication . New York: Routledge, 2002. Barr, Estelle de Young. “A Psychological Analysis of Fashion Motivation.” Archives of Psychology (1934): 26. Barthes, Roland. Roland Barthes: Image – Music – Text . Edited by Stephen Heath. London: Fontana, 1977. Barthes, Roland. The Fashion System . Translated by Richard Howard and Matthew Ward. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983. Barthes, Roland. “Oeuvres Complètes, Vol. 1.” In Fashion Classics: From Carlyle to Barthes , edited by Michael Carter. New York: Berg, 1993. Baudrillard, Jean. Seduction . New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1991. Baudrillard, Jean. Simulacra and Simulation . Ann Arbor: Michago University Press, 1995. Baudrillard, Jean. The Consumer Society . California: Sage Publications, 1998. Baudrillard, Jean. Symbolic Exchange and Death . London: Sage Publications, 2004. Bauman, Zygmunt. Consuming Life . Cambridge: Polity Press, 2007. Belkin, Lisa. “The Feminine Critique.” New York Times , November 1, 2007, Life’s Work section. Bellafante, Ginia. “In ‘The Devil Wears Prada,’ It’s Not Couture, It’s Business (With Accessories).” New York Times , June 18, 2006. Bellah, Robert N. et al., Habits of the Heart . Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985. Benjamin, Walter. Illuminations . New York: Shocken Books, 1968. 220

Berger, John. Ways of Seeing . London: Penguin Books, 1972. Berger, Peter L. and Thomas Luckman. The Social Construction of Reality . New York, Anchor, 1966. Berson, Misha. “Toying with shortcuts to celebrity has its consequence.” The Seattle Times , September 12, 2004, Arts & Entertainment section. Bianco, Robert. “There’s nothing beautiful about ‘The Swan’.” USA Today , April 11, 2004. Binkley, Christina. “Fashion Journal.” Wall Street Journal , June 14, 2007. Bixler, Susan. The New Professional Image . Holbrook, MA: Adams Media Corporation, 1997. Blumer, Herbert. “Fashion Movements” (1939). In Fashion Foundations , edited by Eicher, Joanne B. et al. Oxford: Berg, 2003. Blumer, Herbert. Symbolic Interactionism . Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969. Bourdieu, Pierre. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977. Bourdieu, Pierre. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste . Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987. Buck-Morss, Susan. The Dialectics of Seeing: Walter Benjamin and the Arcades Project . Cambridge: MIT Press, 1989. Butler, Elisabeth. “Tailored-suit shops find fit.” Crain’s New York Business , February 13- 19, 2006. Caldwell, Christopher. “Beyond Human.” New York Times , October 23, 2005. Calefato, Patrizia. The Clothes Body . Oxford: Berg, 2004. Canaday, Sara and Sherry Maysonave. “Image Consulting Image Consultant Training Empowerment Enterprises.” Empowerment Enterprises. http://www.casualpower.com (accessed April 3, 2008). Carey, Benedict. “Who’s Minding the Mind?” New York Times , July 31, 2007. Carlyle, Thomas. Sartor Resartus . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1831 (1987). Carter, Michael, ed. Fashion Classics: From Carlyle to Barthes . New York: Berg, 2003. ———. “China hosts Miss Ugly contest.” The Sydney Morning Herald , December 1, 2003. Chow, Christine, Abbey Cook and Margaret Walch. CAUSEFFECT: Your Breakdown of the Latest Design, Colors and Trends . New York: The Color Association of the United States, February 2007. ———. “Contest: Miss Plastic Surgery.” Cosmetic Surgery.com. http://www.cosmeticsurgery.com/articles/archive/an~67/ (accessed November 1, 2007). Corcoran, Cate T. “Runway Fashion: Kate Spade designs uniforms for Delta’s new would-be-hip airline.” Slate (September 15, 2003) http://www.slate.com/id/2088054. Crane, Diana. Fashion and its Social Agendas . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000. 221

Creswell, Julie. “How Suite It Isn’t: A Dearth of Female Bosses.” New York Times , December 17, 2006. Cunningham, Patricia A. & Linda Welters, eds. Twentiety-Century American Fashion. Oxford: Berg, 2005. Dahinten, Jan. “Singapore Girl, Asia’s Barbie, ready for new look?” USA Today , January 18, 2007. Damhorst, Mary Lynn and Patricia A. Kimle. “Symbolic Interaction: A Grounded Theory Model of the Ideal Business Image for Women.” Caliber 20(1) (1997): 45-66. Damhorst, Mary L., Susan O. Michelman, and Kimberly A. Miller. The Meanings of Dress. New York: Fairchild Publications, 2000. Dareini, Ali Akbar. “Iran’s Vicious Dresstapo Hits Unveiled Gals with Barbaric ‘Banishment’.” New York Post , April 25, 2007. Darwin, Charles. The Origin of Species . New York: Collier, 1961. Darwin, George H. “Development in Dress,” MacMillan’s Magazine , 1872. Davis, Fred. Fashion, Culture, and Identity . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992. De Certeau, Michel. The Practice of Everyday Life . Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. De Lollis, Barbara. “Airlines hope new fashions make financial statement.” USA Today , July 6, 2005. Dearborn, George Van Ness. “The Psychology of Clothing,” The Psychological Monographs (1918): 26. Debord, Guy, The Society of the Spectacle , trans. Donald Nicholson-Smith. New York: Zone Books, 1995. ———. “DeLisa Stiles wins Fox’s ‘The Swan 2’ pageant, but loses husband.” UPI News Service (December 21, 2004), http://www.realitytvworld.com/news/delisa-stiles- wins-fox-the-swan-2-pageant-but-loses-husband-1000000.php. Dewey, John. The Public and its Problems . Athens: Ohio University Press, 1954. Durkheim, Emile. The Rules of Sociological Method and Selected Texts on Sociology , ed. Steven Lukes, trans. W.D. Halls. New York: Free Press, 1982. Durkheim, Emile. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life , trans. Karen E. Fields. New York: The Free Press, 1912 (1995). eHow Staff Expert. “How to Dress to Avoid Looking Like a Toursit.” eHow. http://wwwehow.com/how_16536_dress-avoid-looking.html (accessed June 7, 2007). Eicher, Joanne B. and Mary Ellen Roach, eds. Dress, Adornment, and the Social Order . New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1965. Eicher, Joanne B., Kim K.P. Johnson, and Mary Ellen Roach-Higgins. Dress and Identity . New York: Fairchild Publications, 1995. Eicher, Joanne B., Kim K.P. Johnson, and Susan F. Torntore, eds. Fashion Foundations . Oxford: Berg, 2003. Elias, Norbert. The Society of Individuals . London: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2001. Entwistle, Joanne. The Fashioned Body . Cambridge: Polity Press, 2000. 222

Entwistle, Joanne and Elizabeth Wilson, eds. Body Dressing . Oxford: Berg, 2001. Feinberg, Lesie. Transgender Warriors: Making History from Joan of Arc to Rupaul . Boston, Beacon Press, 1996. Fischler, Marcelle S. “‘Grey’s Anatomy’… and Closet.” New York Times , February 25, 2007. Flugel, J.C. The Psychology of Clothes . London: Hogarth, 1930. Forero, Juan. “The Fashion of the Populist.” New York Times , February 2, 2006. Frisby, David. Fragments of Modernity . Cambridge: Polity, 1985. Garve, Christian. “On Fashion” (1792). In The Rise of Fashion , by Daniel Leonhard Purdy. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press, 2004. Glick, Peter and Susan T. Fiske. “The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70(3) (March 1996): 491-512. Goffman, Erving. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life . New York: Double Day, 1959. Goffman, Erving. Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates . New York: Anchor Books, 1961. Goffman, Erving. Sigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity . New York: Simon and Schuster, Inc., 1963. Goffman, Erving. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-To-Face Behavior. New York: Pantheon Books, 1967. Goldfarb, Jeffrey. The Politics of Small Things: The Power of the Powerless in Dark Times . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006. Graff, James. “The Woman Who Would Be France’s President.” Time Magazine , October 1, 2006. Hamermesh, Daniel S., Xin Meng and Jensen Zhang. “Dress For Success – Does Primping Pay?” Land Economics 9 , July 3, 2002. Hamermesh, D.S., et al. “Business success and businesses’ beauty capital.” Economics Letters 93 , December 2006. Halbwachs, Maurice. On Collective Memory . Edited and translated by Lewis A. Coser. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992. Hegel, Georg W.F. “On Drapery” (1820). In Aesthetics , translated by T.M. Knox. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. Heyman, Marshall. “The Socialista Universe.” New York Magazine , May 7, 2007. Hollander, Anne. Seeing Through Clothes . Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975. Hollander, Anne. Sex and Suits . New York: Kodansha International, 1994. Hollander, Anne. Feeding the Eye . New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1999. ———. “How to Be a Preppy Girl.” wikiHow. http://www.wikihow.com/Be-a-Preppy- Girl (accessed July 11, 2007). ———. “How to Be Like a New Yorker.” wikiHow. http://www.wikihow.com/Be-Like- a-New-Yorker (accessed June 7, 2007). 223

———. “How to Look Preppy.” wikiHow. http://www.wikihow.com/Look-Preppy (accessed July 11, 2007). Hurlock, Elizabeth B. “Motivation in Fashion,” Archives of Psychology 17(3) (1929): 5. Inter IKEA Systems. “Be brave, not beige.” Inter IKEA Systems. http://www.bebravenotbeige.com (accessed June 7, 2007). Jacinto, Leela. “The Veil Is Not Oppression, It’s Chic, Say Muslim Women.” ABC News , March 7, 2002. Jones, Del. “Does height equal power? Some CEOs say yes.” USA Today , July 17, 2007. Kaiser, Susan B. The Social Psychology of Clothing . New York: MacMillan Publishing Company, 1985. Kant, Immanuel. Political Writings . Edited by H.S. Reiss. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970 (1991). ———. “Kate Spade to Bring style Back to Air Travel with Song; Kate Spade to Design Uniforms for New Song Airline.” Business Wire , August 13, 2003. Kawamura, Yuniya. Fashion-ology . Oxford: Berg, 2005. Keenan, William J.F. Dressed to Impress . Oxford: Berg, 2001. Konigsberg, Eric. “Made in the Shade.” The New Yorker , January 22, 2007. Kracauer, Siegfried. The Mass Ornament . Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1963 (1995). Krupp, Charla. How Not to Look Old . New York: Springboard Press, 2008. Kuczynski, Alex. Beauty Junkies: Inside Our $15 Billion Obsession with Cosmetic Surgery . New York: Doubleday, 2006. La Ferla, Ruth. “We, Myself and I.” New York Times , April 5, 2007. Lasch, Christopher. The Culture of Narcissism . New York: Norton & Company, 1979. Laver, James. Taste and Fashion . London: Harrap, 1937. Laver, James. Style in Costume . London: Oxford University Press, 1949. Laver, James. Modesty in Dress . Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1969. Lewis, Wendy. The Beauty Battle . San Diego: Laurel Glen, 2002. Lewis, Wendy. Plastic Makes Perfect . London: Orion Books, 2007. Lipovetsky, Giles. The Empire of Fashion: Dressing Modern Democracy . Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994. Lotze, Rudolph Hermann. Microcosmos: An Essay Concerning Man and his Relation to the World . Edinburg: T.T. Clark, 1887. Lukács, Georg. History and Class Consciousness . Cambridge: MIT Press, 1971. Lurie, Alison. The Language of Clothes . New York: Henry Holt and Co., 2000. Marshall, Samantha. “Execs play dress-up: Casual look replaced by suits; pastels popular.” Crain’s New York Business , October 3, 2005, Business Lives section. Marshall, Samantha. “Fashion faux pas: Some women learn the hard way what works.” Crain’s New York Business , January 16, 2006, Business Lives section. Marx, Karl. The Marx-Engels Reader . Edited by Robert C. Tucker. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1978. Maurstad, Tom. “Colors could soon be corporate property.” Dallas Morning News , February 2, 2007, Arts & Entertainment section. 224

Mauss, Marcel. The Category of the Person: Anthropology, Philosophy, History . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1938 (1985). Mauss, Marcel. “Techniques of the Body.” In Economy and Society 2:70:88 (1935, 1973). Maysonave, Sherry. Casual Power . Austin: Bright Books, 1999. Mead, George Herbert. Mind, Self, and Society from the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist . Edited by Charles W. Morris. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962. Mead, Rebecca. “Proud Flesh: The cult of cosmetic surgery.” The New Yorker , November 13, 2006. Merkin, Daphne. “The Politics of Appearance.” New York Times , August 26, 2007. Meyrowitz, Joshua. No Sense of Place . New York: Oxford University Press, 1985. Milgram, Stanley. “Behavioral Study of Obedience.” In Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 67(4) (1963) 371-378. Milgram, Stanley. Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View . New York: HarperCollins, 1974. Montaigne, M. The Essays of Montaigne, Vol. 1 . London: Oxford University, 1575 (1927). Montgomery, Nancy. “Army reservist undergoes glamorous transformation, wins ‘Swan’ reality show.” Stars and Stripes , January 16, 2005, Pacific edition. Molloy, John T. New Women’s Dress for Success . New York: Warner Books, 1996. Morton, Grace Margaret. “Psychology of Dress.” In Journal of Home Economics 18 (1926). Navarro, Mireya. “When You Contain Multitudes.” New York Times , April 24, 2005. Neilson, April. “Is Chest Beating as Good for People as It Is for Primates?” Stanford Graduate School of Business News , March 2007. Owen, David. “The Soundtrack of Your Life: Muzak in the realm of retail theatre.” New Yorker , April 10, 2006. Pietras, Jamie. “Chinese plastic surgery pageant draws criticism.” Cosmetic Surgery Times , November 1, 2004. Pozner, Jennifer L. “The Unreal World: Why women on “reality TV” have to be hot, desperate and dumb.” Ms. Magazine , Fall 2004. Prokosch, M., R. Yeo, and G.F. Miller. ”Intelligence tests with higher g-loadings show higher correlations with body symmetry: Evidence for a general fitness factor mediated by developmental stability.” In Intelligence 33 (2005): 203-213. Purdy, Daniel Leonhard. The Rise of Fashion . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2004. ———. “Preppy.” Urban Dictionary. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term= preppy&page1 (accessed July 11, 2007). Rich, Motoko. “Song (the airline) opens new SoHo store.” Wired New York , November 6, 2003. Riesman, David. The Lonely Crowd . New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961. 225

Roberts, Kenneth J. “Managing Image in a Dynamic Corporate Environment.” Lippencott Mercer. http://www.lippincottmercer.com/insights/a_roberts03.shtml (accessed April 7, 2007). Rosenbloom, Stephanie. “The Obscure and Uncertain Semiotics of Fashion.” New York Times , March 5, 2006, Ideas & Trends section. Rosenbloom, Stephanie. “Their Looks for Fall 2008.” New York Times , October 25, 2007. Rosenbloom, Stephanie. “Putting Your Best Cyberface Forward.” New York Times , January 3, 2008. Rotstein, Gary. “Colors carry shades of meaning.” Pittsburg Post-Gazette , November 13, 2006. Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. Discourse on the Sciences and Arts . Hanover: University Press of New England, 1750 (1992). Rubinstein, Ruth P. Dress Codes: Meanings and Messages in American Culture . Boulder: Westview Press, 1995. Saussure, Ferdinand de. Course in General Linguistics . New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1959. Sennett, Richard. “Two on the Aisle.” The New York Review of Books , November 1, 1973. Sennett, Richard. The Fall of Public Man . New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1976. ———. “Sexy Attire Can Work Against Businesswomen.” The News Vault . http://www.thenewsvault.com/cgi/news.pl?t=330. Shubow, Justin. “Better Than a Park Bench.” Slate (July 21, 2006) http://www.slate.com/id/2146220/. Simmel, Georg. “Fashion.” In On Individuality and Social Forms . Edited by Donald N. Levine. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1901 (1971). Simmel, Georg. “The Metropolis and Mental Life.” In On Individuality and Social Forms . Edited by Donald N. Levine.” Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1901 (1971). Simmel, Georg. “Adornment.” In Simmel on Culture . Edited by D. Frisby and M. Featherstone. London: Save, 1908 (1997). Singer, Natasha. “Nice Résumé. Have You Considered Botox?” New York Times , January 24, 2008, Skin Deep section. Singh, Dev. “Adaptive significance of female physical attractiveness: Role of waist-to- hip ratio.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65 (1993): 293-307. Sombart, Werner. “Economy and Fashion: a Theoretical Contribution on the Formation of Modern Consumer Demand” (1902) In The Rise of Fashion by Daniel Leonhard Purdy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2004. Spencer, Herbert. “Fashion.” In The Rise of Fashion by Daniel Leonhard Purdy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2004. Spencer, Herbert. The Principles of Sociology . New York and London: Appleton, 1924. Sweeney, Camille “Never Too Young for That First Pedicure” New York Times , February 28, 2008, Skin Deep section. 226

Tannen, Deborah. “ Wears Jump Suit. Sensible Shoes. Uses Husband’s Last Name.” (Originally titled “Marked Woman, Unmarked Men”). The New York Times Magazine , June 20, 1993. Tarde, Gabriel de. The Laws of Imitation . Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith, 1962. ———. “The Swan (TV series).” Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Swan_(TV_series) (accessed November 1, 2007). ———. “To those that have, shall be given.” The Economist , December 19, 2007. Touby, Laurel. “UnBeige.” MediaBistro. http://www.mediabistro.com/unbeige (accessed June 7, 2007). Trebay, Guy. “Enter the House of Wal-Mart.” New York Times , April 10, 2006. Trebay, Guy. “Look at Me, Look at Me. Please Look at Me.” New York Times , September 17, 2006, Fashion Diary section. Trebay, Guy. “Beautiful Business.” New York Times , October 12, 2006. Trebay, Guy. “Venturing Seaside, Modestly.” New York Times , July 12, 2007. Trebay, Guy. “Campaign Chic: Not Too Cool, Never Ever Hot.” New York Times , July 22, 2007. Uyttenbroed, Ellie and Ari Versluis. “Exactitudes.” http://www.exactitudes.com (accessed April 3, 2008). Veblen, Thorstein. “The Economic Theory of Women’s Dress.” Popular Science Monthly 46 (1894). Veblen, Thorstein. The Theory of the Leisure Class . New York: Random House, 1899 (2001). Vischer, Friedrich. “Fashion and Cynicism” (1879). In The Rise of Fashion by Daniel Leonhard Purdy, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2004. Volin, Kathryn J. Buff and Polish . Minneapolis: Pentagon Publishing, 1999. Vora, Shivani. “Money Doesn’t Talk.” New York Times , January 14, 2007. Walker, Rob. “Faux Logo.” New York Times , May 14, 2006, Magazine section. Walker, Rob. “Notes From the Brand Underground.” New York Times , July 30, 2006, Magazine section 6. Walker, Rob. “Good Disguise.” New York Times , February 4, 2007, Consumed section. Weber, Max. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Translated by Talcott Parsons. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1958. Weber, Max. Economy and Society . Edited by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978. White, E.B. Here is New York . New York: The Little Bookroom, 1949 (1999). Wilner, Isaiah. “The Number-One Girl.” New York Magazine , May 7, 2007. Wilson, Elizabeth. Adorned in Dreams: Fashion and Modernity . New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2003. Wilson, Eric. “O.K., Knockoffs, This Is War.” New York Times , March 30, 2006. Wilson, Eric. “Who Put the Black in Black Style?” New York Times , August 31, 2006. Wilson, Eric. “Red Carpet or Rehab, It All Sells.” New York Times , June 21, 2007. 227

Winerman, L. “Sexist countries view men as ‘bad, but bold.” Monitor on Psychology 35(6) (June 2004): 15. Witte, Samuel Simon. “An Answer to the Question: Would it Be Harmful or Beneficial to Establish a National Uniform?” (1791) In The Rise of Fashion by Daniel Leonhard Purdy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2004. Wolin, Sheldon S. “The Rise of Private Man.” The New York Review of Books , April 14, 1977. Wolin, Sheldon S. “ Breaking the Code.” The New York Review of Books, June 9, 1977. Yaeger, Lynn. “Doll Face.” New York Times , February 20, 2005. Yaeger, Lynn. “Carried Away.” The Atlantic Monthly (April 2007), http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200704/yaeger-handbags. Young, Agnes B. Recurring Cycles of Fashion . New York: Harper and Brothers, 1937. Zoepf, Katherine. “Barbie With a Prayer Mat.” New York Times , September 22, 2005. 228

APPENDIX A

INTERVIEWEE PHOTOGRAPHS

Arjun Appadurai 106

Betty Sue Flowers 109

Harold Koda 107

Jack Bredenfoerder 110

Clayton Curtis 108

229

Lynn Yaeger 113 Alexander Julian 111

112 Sherry Maysonaye

Ari Versluis and 114 Ellie Uyttenbroek

230

Mary Lynn Damhorst 117

Allison Aston 115

Wendy Lewis 116

Susan Dresner 118

231

Sylvia Moss 119

Su Matthews 122

Bob Pollack 123

Peter Glick 120

Alex Chantecaille 121